Why A Yes Vote For The Iran Nuclear Deal Is A No-Brainer

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Copy and paste of what I said the last time you fell one of my booby-traps, with additional bold emphasis:

First, what I said earlier in the thread:

"'I use Dragon NaturallySpeaking, Version 13, to dictate my replies. My voice gets converted to typed text. I don't change every mistake it makes, as I know that desperate people would jump at those mistakes the way Olongapo kids jumped into muddy waters after coins tossed in, or like Iraqi kids rushing in after candy thrown on street sides.' -- herfacechair

"Now, what, exactly, did I mean by that?

"Erroneous word usage, misspelled words, or any other simple error, that I leave in my posts, are there for a purpose. What purpose? I use "errors" to measure the desperation of the opposition. I find that the more desperate the opposition becomes, in the debate, they tend to zero in on misspelled words, erroneous word usage, or any other simple error.

"The opposition goes grammar police mode when they know, deep down inside, that they are losing the debate. You cannot win in a straight up debate, so you desperately reach for what you think would "gain you points." In this case, finding something I misspelled, misused, or any other mistake.

"The trend, in your replies to me, shows that of someone who knows that he cannot take me on directly. You're desperate to find anything wrong, and you find it with the wrong word. I tossed that coin into nasty waters, you, desperate for change, jumped right in. - herfacechair

Your desperation was such, that I left an even bigger error in my post. I knew that you were so desperate, that despite my disclosing why I left errors in my post, you would go for them again in desperation.

Figured out why I use the "Puss in the boots in the glory hole booth" against you? Again, everything I say and do has a purpose.

You've proven to be the most desperate person on this thread. Oh, yeah, I'll come back when I deem it necessary.

I go grammar police because if you can't bother to get that right, what else are you not bothering to get right. It's an attention to detail. A military man would understand this.

And then you try and convince us you left them there on purpose. Good one, shitbird. Sell crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

But you DO believe in REAL FAGS, like you and assup !

Womby's arguments are gay. He should change his username to DickSucker in order for it to be consistent with his "Puss in the Boots in the Glory Hole Stall/Booth" description. His arguments are also deficient of facts.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Womby's arguments are gay. He should change his username to DickSucker in order for it to be consistent with his "Puss in the Boots in the Glory Hole Stall/Booth" description. His arguments are also deficient of facts.

An argument has no sexual orientation. Dicksucker? That's the best you've got? Go home, you malignant cunt.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

[Attention to detail stupid, or don't lecture others about it.]

You stanking-ass motherfucker [Period?]

[Should be: You stinky ass motherfucker.]

You're just pissed that whenever he's upstairs nailing your mother, she's not available to crap in your mouth. Otherwise, where else will you get the shit that you spew on these threads all day and night? The wait must be torturous for you. The time stamps, of your posts here, suggests that you live in this message board.

If you're a freelancer, not saying that you are, but if you are, don't admit it. Your constant presence on this message board throughout the day and night would argue against that.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

I go grammar police because if you can't bother to get that right, what else are you not bothering to get right. It's an attention to detail. A military man would understand this.

And then you try and convince us you left them there on purpose. Good one, shitbird. Sell crazy somewhere else, we're all stocked up here.

Wrong, you go grammar police on me because you are getting more desperate. You cannot score any points in the actual debate, and you know that. You cannot address my argument without taking it out of context, and without advancing a strawman. So, in desperation, you go for something else.

Also, quit trying to copycat what you read. Again, you claimed that you put me on ignore, yet, your actions contradict that. If you can't get it right about what you are going to do, where I get it right, where else are going to be wrong in the face of me being right?

Also, I know what's going on with my cognitive processes, you don't. What I stated above is precisely what's going on in my mind. Like I said earlier, there's a purpose behind anything I say and do. This includes leaving misspelled words, and erroneously used words, as well as other errors. This is deliberate, not negligent.

You've reacted precisely the way I have predicted. You've done so in a way that has made me laughed at your reactions.

Also, you need to start addressing our comments, and what we actually said, instead of addressing what you thought or hoped we said. All you've done was advance strawmen arguments and lob ad hominem attacks. Refrain from that, and actually stand up to argue against what we actually said. Do that before you lecture anybody about "attention to detail."

I'm not trying to sell crazy, don't accuse me of doing what you're doing. Combined with the rest of the idiots on your side of the argument, you guys are generating enough crazy to make the United States the lead exporter on crazy. You're the one that's peddling the conspiracy whack job theories. If you can't pull your head out of your ass, and remove your horse blinders, go be a retard elsewhere.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

HAAAAAGGHHHK! HAAAAAAAAGHHHK! HAAAAAGGGHPFFFTUUUU!

Sit DOWN puss in boots in the glory hole booth. You weren't asked to hack up a pubic hair ball stuck together with sperm, that's nasty!

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

These idiot libtards like to flash around their extensive knowledge of revised history, the way phony cops like to flash their phony badges. These people are driven by emotion and hate. Anything that massages their ego gets accepted without verification. Then, they get butthurt when they get their arses handed to them in debate.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Blue colored bullshit, HerrGoebbelsChair. You're the propaganda minister for the New World Order.

Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf? Baghdad Bob? Is that you?

Don't dismiss a fact based, logical argument as "blue colored bullshit," quotation marks used strongly. Simply saying that is not effective refutation, DaleGribbleGuy. You have to actually present an actual argument, or verify what is said against the facts, in order to judge one way or another the validity of my responses.

Again, it's not propaganda when it's based on facts, logic, and reason. Propaganda is what you are spewing on this thread. You talked about this "military industrial complex" that's allegedly "controlling" things and calling the shots. You insist that they "run the government." Yet, you provided no evidence. Just your tinfoil hat propaganda nonsense.

Again, counter propaganda is one of the things that would fall under my MOS while deployed overseas. I know propaganda when I see it, and what you post is propaganda. You're just yapping your mouth proving that you know so much about things that aren't true.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I'm not challenging him because he's a veteran. I'm challenging him because he fails to see the truth.

Why don't you quit lying about being a Christian and having an attorney, you phony bastard, WeeEndowed1.911"?

You're not challenging me at all. All you're doing is spewing tinfoil hat propaganda and insisting that that is the truth. What I see as the truth are things supported by the facts. Your arguments are not supported by the fact. How could you insist that your opinions, not supported by fact, are the "truth"?

As far as my not "seeing" what you want me to see. I've never changed my position, in an online-argument, because of something said by the person that I was arguing with.

I'm not the one that refuses to see the truth. I see it, based on my research and observations. For example what you and ScattRaider insist the "military industrial complex" does is simply not realistic. The facts indicate that they would turn to the government in a bid to get contracts. This happens during peace or during war. They happen to be drastically outnumbered by other businesses and corporations that operate in the US free market economy.

It seems that you guys are confusing the military industrial complex that existed during World War II to the reality that exists today. I see that Scatt Boy ignored that argument, and, instead, went straight for my one of my many booby-traps to show me how desperate he is.

Again, corporate leadership from middle-management and up are overwhelmed with their job duties. They are so overwhelmed, that time-management courses are offered in course programs provided to these professionals. If they are overwhelmed with their normal corporate duties, what makes people think that they would turn around and try to exert control over the government, and to dictate policy? That simply doesn't make sense.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Wish he's a RINO back then....

Back then, he had access to the facts. We he talked about, back then, was consistent with what we were getting through military intelligence channels. In the book, Through the Eyes of the Enemy, Stanislav Lunev explained how he, as part of a Russian para-special forces unit, trained the Iraqis how to conceal WMD. Not only did this include moving them to another location, but it also included creating casings that made the WMD look like any other object in the environment.

The terrorists utilized this tactic when hiding IED's. Even MRE wrappers and empty water bottles were used as "casing" during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

In the book, he talked about how they worked with Russian intelligence that were part of the inspection team. They would communicate with Stanislav Lunev's element, then they would advise, and teach, the Iraqis how to move WMD elsewhere. There was a parallel, between Stanislav Lunev's description during the first inspections, and Colin Powell's description regarding the second inspections.

This was consistent with information we were receiving as we were heading into the theater to start operation Iraqi freedom.

Facts are facts, it would not have made a difference if he was a socialist back then. If he based his information on the facts, what he was politically is irrelevant as insinuated in the above post.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

[STRAWMAN + RED HERRING]

Good post Andy. The USA never did find the WMD's that Powell was talking about. Our soldiers only found the weapons that the USA had sold Iraq as far back as 1980. Those weapons had corroded and were NO LONGER FUNCTIONAL.

J. D. Barleycorn, you remember posting that link by the New York times?

Your side of the argument argued that there were "NO" weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and that Bush "lied." What state the WMD were in, or when they were produced, is irrelevant, as that is not what you guys argued. You guys argued that there was "NO" weapons of mass destruction there.

First, WMD were used as early as World War I. Iraq, in the later half of the 20th century, was fully capable of creating its own chemical and biological agents. That's precisely what they did. The Iraqis produced that stuff themselves.

Second, the military personnel that were attacked by sarin, mustard, and blister agent laced IED's, were treated for chemical agent related injuries. Your statement about them being "no longer functional" is wrong. Those service members and coalition members who were also impacted by such IDs, were treated for chemical related injuries, not just for IED injuries.

In the article that you are asking J.D. Barleycorn for, they mention that as soon as the soldiers found out that they happened on a stockpile, that the element commander ordered the soldiers handling the WMD to let go of the casing and to get out of there. That article also mentions soldiers wanting treatment for exposure to WMD, but not receiving it quick enough.

That would not be the case if these WMD were "not functional."

The mere fact that there were WMD's in Iraq proves wrong the argument that they had "none." It also proves wrong that Bush "lied." He didn't. As I mentioned in an earlier post, what Collen Powell talkred about was fact. Stanislav Lunev, the highest GRU officer to defect to the United States, was part of such an operation in the 1990s. As a member of a Russian para-special forces element, his specific task was to get the Iraqis to move WMD out of inspectors' way. Just like described in Collen Powell's speech. They were playing that same again during the second weapons inspections.

Of course they were not going to find those specific WMD's that were moved around. But, the fact of the matter is that weapons of mass destruction WERE in Iraq as President Bush, and conservatives, argued. This leads me to a question that I love to ask your side of the argument, which has not been answered yet:

Were you guys wrong when you guys argued that Iraq had no WMD? YES [ ] NO [ ]

Here's a copy and paste of what I've said in previous debates in response to similar "No WMD, nonfunctional WMD" screeds:

"ISG was unable to complete its investigation and is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was evacuated to Syria before the war," -- Duelfer

"He transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria," General Yaalon, Isreili officer

And, a former member of Saddam's own circle:

Retired General Georges Sada was a senior ranking Iraqi Airforce General. His seniority put him within Saddam's circles. According to him, his pilots carried out emergency evacuation on the WMD in the months leading up to the war:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,182932,00.html

"General, when did you come to the United States?

GEORGE SADA, AUTHOR, "SADDAM'S SECRETS": Well, I came two years ago.

HANNITY: And up to that point, you were in Iraq?

SADA: Yes, I was in Iraq.

HANNITY: And you were Saddam Hussein's top military advisor?

SADA: Yes, I was No. 2 in the air force.

HANNITY: And how many years did you work under him?

SADA: I worked since the revolution of 1968.

HANNITY: From the beginning?

HANNITY: Some people say they were destroyed. Did we still have them leading up to the invasion?

SADA: No, he had a very good organization that Saddam was created to show some of them but to continue to hide.

HANNITY: So he had them.

SADA: Yes.

HANNITY: Where were they? And were they moved and where?

SADA: Well, up to the year 2002, 2002, in summer, they were in Iraq. And after that, when Saddam realized that the inspectors are coming on the first of November and the Americans are coming, so he took the advantage of a natural disaster happened in Syria, a dam was broken. So he -- he announced to the world that he is going to make an air bridge...

HANNITY: You know for a fact he moved these weapons to Syria?

SADA: Yes.

HANNITY: How do you know that?

SADA: I know it because I have got the captains of the Iraqi airway that were my friends, and they told me these weapons of mass destruction had been moved to Syria.

BECKEL: How did he move them, general? How were they moved?

SADA: They were moved by air and by ground, 56 sorties by jumbo, 747, and 27 were moved, after they were converted to cargo aircraft, they were moved to Syria."

I used that in response to another WMD related argument back in 2010. Included in there is a copy and paste of what I said in a WMD argument in the last decade. It's like what I said, I complete these debate threads with the same stance on issues as I had before entering the argument.

I do save my arguments, here and on other message boards. Since you people like to argue from the same propaganda points, I tend to exercise the option of copying and pasting what I said the last time another idiot said the same thing... Whether that's here or on another message board.

[herfacechair]

flghtr65: Iran will be able to produce a nuclear weapon after 15 years. On Page 26, Item #25, The item reads that Iran cannot produce or purchase highly enriched uranium-235 at (20% concentration) or plutonium for 15 years. After 15 years this restriction is lifted.

From the text of the agreement:

"Iran will begin phasing out its IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. During this period, Iran will keep its enrichment capacity at Natanz at up to a total installed uranium enrichment capacity of 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Excess Centrifiges and enrichmen t-related infrastructure at Natanz will be stored under IAEA continuous monitoring, as specified in Annex I." -- Page 6 of 159 of the Iran nuclear agreement.

What's the big deal about IR-1 centrifuges?

http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles...el-collection/

April 15, 2015

The IR-1 is the workhorse of Iran's enrichment program, with over 15,000 installed at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz and 2,710 installed at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. The IR-1 is Iran's first centrifuge, and is based off Pakistan's P-1 machine supplied via the A.Q. Khan black-market network in the 1980s and 1990s.

Based on what the Iranians are willing to admit to, and what is suspected, the IR-1 is centerpiece in their suspected nuclear program. Without the IR-1, no nuclear weapon... unless you're willing to entertain the reality that exists in 3rd world countries and what they're willing to do relative to what is traditionally done by governments and by western civilization.

They must start dismantling their IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. Many of the, "Iran will not seek.... " Comments have a shelf life of 15 years. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they're estimating that it'd take up to 5 years to completely phase out these centrifuges? And it so happens that they're limiting Iran for 15 years because the negotiators anticipate that the Iranians "wouldn't" have any centrifuges by that time?

Which brings us to my question...

How the holy God dammed fuck, based on your own arguments and the above facts, as well as the contradictory comments you made as recorded in my last reply to you regarding this, are they going to generate a nuclear weapon?

Unless, you're willing to look at the reality of what people in 3rd World countries are willing, and able, to do relative to what governments traditionally do? Again:

Which brings me back to my earlier question to you. WHERE, in the TEXT of the agreement, does it specifically state that the objective of the agreement is to prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb until after 15 years? WHERE?

flghtr65: There are only two substances that can be used to make an Atomic Bomb like the ones used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The substances are:
U-235 at enriched at 20% or Plutonium. Jackie S, talked about this in one of his posts.

And like I said throughout this thread. The agreement is based on what the Iranians are willing to admit, and what they're been verified to have. It's not based on what the Iranians aren't willing to admit to having. Also, its success depends on the Iranians being 100% honest, as well as they're willingness to restrict themselves to what's in the agreement.

Outside of what they're willing to admit to having, and outside of what the inspectors know exists, the agreement is meaningless, and doesn't impact when the Iranians would ultimately detonate their first nuclear bombs.

flghtr65: After 15 years Iran can try to purchase these substances or try to make it themselves from the Uranium ore that they have in the ground.

And create a nuclear bomb with what, assuming that we're in a perfect world and the agreement captures everything that exists, and the Iranians were honest, and will abide completely by the agreement? By the time 15 years rolls around, assuming that we're in a perfect world, the Iranians would've phased out all of their IR-1s. That's what I got from going through the text of the agreement.

If you go through the document, you'd find that they attempted to set things up to prevent Iran from ever detonating a nuclear bomb. After they assume that the Iranians wouldn't have enrichment capability, or enough of it to create a nuclear bomb, of course they're going to put down, "for 15 years."

Perhaps I'll find the text about the number of kitchen sinks that we have to send to Iran before I come across the one that says that the intent of this deal was to push out their ability to detonate a nuclear bomb sometime after 15 years.

flghtr65: Harold Brown is correct in what he said in post #1. [REPEAT POINT]

No, he's wrong, just like I've argued throughout this thread. The way the agreement is written, it assumes that the Iranians are honest, and will be honest and abide by the deal. It also assumes that they have everything covered, based on what the Iranians are willing to verify that they have. Harold Brown failed to factor in the operational/tactical/logistical variables that'd make this agreement useless.

The way it's written, it doesn't prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb when it would otherwise have detonated a nuclear bomb, whether it's in the next 5, 15, 20 years. In a perfect world, where the Iranians admit to everything, and do everything that they're supposed to do, the agreement would "prevent" them from ever creating a nuclear weapon. But, we know how that'd work out with the Iranians. In the real world, with all the variables at play, that agreement doesn't do much to prevent Iran from eventually having a nuclear weapon.

flghtr65: Here are the only two nuclear fission reactions that can produce the fission fragments material needed for an Atomic Bomb. These reactions must be run in a NUCLEAR reactor. If you try to run this in the oven in your home, you will just BURN your house down.

You missed the point behind my bringing that up. I repeatedly stated, throughout this thread, that people living in the 3rd world are capable of doing things, on a simpler scale, to what governments do on a more complex scale.

If you read the article that I linked to earlier in this thread, the guy freaked out over what it did on his stove top. This, as with any other attempts to mess with science, has led to changes in how they did the same thing the next time. Would he have tried to do that on his stove top the next time? Based on his reactions, no. He would've gotten together with someone, with knowledge on how to handle something that's as hot as what the first guy observed, and they would've came up with something clever. Then, the first guy would've ran his experiment again and, based on that, would've came up with adjustments.

Do you see the trend that's happening here? People in Third World countries do things in a simple environment what people in the west would do in controlled, advanced, environments. Some of it isn't wise, but others are simply better ways of doing things.

Now, translate this to a government entity that goes this route. The Iranians weren't completely honest about what they had. What's in the agreement represent known infrastructure. You're not going to detect unknown infrastructure by just pointing a satellite at all of Iran. You have to know exactly where to look at in order to catch their other infrastructure.

flghtr65: Iran will have the ability to run either of these reactions AFTER 15 years and will be able produce an Atomic Bomb. [REPEAT POINT]

From the text of the agreement:

"Iran will begin phasing out its IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. During this period, Iran will keep its enrichment capacity at Natanz at up to a total installed uranium enrichment capacity of 5060 IR-1 centrifuges. Excess Centrifiges and enrichmen t-related infrastructure at Natanz will be stored under IAEA continuous monitoring, as specified in Annex I." -- Page 6 of 159 of the Iran nuclear agreement.

What's the big deal about IR-1 centrifuges?

http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles...el-collection/

PrintShareEmailTwitterFacebook LinkedIn
April 15, 2015

The IR-1 is the workhorse of Iran's enrichment program, with over 15,000 installed at the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP) at Natanz and 2,710 installed at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. The IR-1 is Iran's first centrifuge, and is based off Pakistan's P-1 machine supplied via the A.Q. Khan black-market network in the 1980s and 1990s.

Based on what the Iranians are willing to admit to, and what is suspected, the IR-1 is centerpiece in their suspected nuclear program. Without the IR-1, no nuclear weapon... unless you're willing to entertain the reality that exists in 3rd world countries and what they're willing to do relative to what is traditionally done by governments and by western civilization.

They must start dismantling their IR-1 centrifuges in 10 years. Many of the, "Iran will not seek...." Comments have a shelf life of 15 years. Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they're estimating that it'd take up to 5 years to completely get rid of these centrifuges? And it so happens that they're limiting Iran for 15 years because the negotiators anticipate that the Iranians wouldn't have any centrifuges by that time?

Which brings us to my question...

How the holy God dammed fuck, based on your own arguments and the above facts, as well as the contradictory comments you made as recorded in my last reply to you regarding this, are they going to generate a nuclear weapon?

Unless, you're willing to look at the reality of what people in 3rd World countries are willing, and able, to do relative to what governments traditionally do? Again:

Which brings me back to my earlier question to you. WHERE, in the TEXT of the agreement, does it specifically state that the objective of the agreement is to prevent Iran from detonating a nuclear bomb until after 15 years? WHERE?

flghtr65: The U235 used must be highly enriched to 20% or the bomb will be a dud.

Again, in a perfect world where the Iranians admit to everything, and are completely honest, and the agreement captures everything there is to be captured, this'd be the case. But, this isn't a perfect world, the Iranians were even caught cheating during the negotiations. They're going to cheat this one as well. Also, given that they wouldn't admit to everything that they have, the unknown infrastructure is what could deliver where the known infrastructure won't be able to deliver.

flghtr65: HFC, You have just lost your first on-line argument. Study up.

Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf? Comical Ali? Is that you?

As you can see, the facts indicate that I remain undefeated in these online debates. How does your ass taste? I had a greater time shoving it down your throat in this post than I did in the previous posts.

However, the mere fact that you would hold that opinion suggests that even you recognize that I win these debates. If you want to get an idea of how I saw your, ROTFLFAO, claim of "beating" me, watch this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfAeMtcURg0

[WTF]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

What part of, driven by their ideology to do something until they are faced with their mortality, did you not understand?.

That can be said about each and every one of us....what part of that don't you understand?

You're a War monger. At least you have worn the uniform, much more than many of these War mongers can say.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WTF

You think Saddam Hussein was a leader in Iran?

Go back and read the post in there. Nowhere in his post did he argue that Saddam Hussein was a leader in Iran. Think geopolitics on a regional multinational scale. Pay attention to what you read, FOCUS!

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

It's typical of woomby to try to twist things into a narrative like the lying liberal that he is. Just look at his responses to others' posts here on a variety of subjects. He's one of those that keeps saying " It depends on what the definition of "is" is " when challenged about what he says in HIS posts. woomby the EUNUCH can never defend any position he takes, and then reverts to the libs play book of ranting, speculation, and name calling when he's getting his swishy ass kicked. And if that doesn't work, he'll put someone on "ignore" all the while having his WK's tell him what's being said about his sorry, lying Gloryhole Guru ass. It would figure that he lives in a state with perhaps the most famous lying couple, and his heroes, Slick Willy and Shrillary. He's a cum guzzling scumbag that's pissed off at the world for him being born a EUNUCH and feels entitled to all that his eyes survey, without having to earn any of it. If it's not shoved at him through a hole in a men's room stall, woomby just too lazy go after it. Look at how many jobs he's claims to have had on here. His atrocious spelling proves him a liar about being " a freelance writer of travel brochures". How many magazine editors would buy an article with spelling errors and conclusions not supported by verifiable facts from woomby, unless they wanted to make him the Arkansas version of Jason Blair of New York Times fame and for the editors to be laughed out of a job ?

BWAAAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAI Yup, that about sums it up.

WombRaider has demonstrated enough attitude, and behavior, to suggest that IF he were a freelance writer, there's a good chance that he's not one now.

He doesn't give a shit about the facts, and he keeps plowing on despite being wrong. Chances are that he got into more than one argument with his clients about his work. His client calls him up, or emails him, asking for clarification. Or, the client kicked his draft back with a crap load of comments. What does Scat Boy do? He argues with his client instead of making the corrections, and learning from the comments. Nope, Turd has a "better" idea of how their writing should go.

Usually, if they like your work, you understand their mission, "hit the nail on the head" with your writing, have good rapport, etc., they'd call you back. They'd refer you to others that could use your services. A travel brochure is just one of their products. They have other commercial freelance writing products that they'd use him for. At any rate, WombRaider would be busy right now, too busy to spend all day on ECCIE.

So, IF he made such a claim, he's either full of it, or he was one before. In the later situation, he shot himself in the foot with his attitude.