This is the last one - But you really need to read! - I have never said my source (A family friend in the SOF community for 18 years) was not a witness to Mr. Chalabi - I said he wasn't one of the two ODA's assigned to Mr. Chalabi!! - But he did most certainly deal with Mr. Chalabi for apprx a month!! - He also spoke directly with the two ODA's that worked with Mr. Chalabi (which brings the total count to over 24 + Soldiers!) - What can't you comprehend about that!
Lastly, why do you keep saying "anonymous" sources - When I have clearly given TWO NAMES - Majors Wurst and Burns - These are TWO NAMES .....Now, I understand you tried to weirdly suggest these were actually two other people earlier above on this thread.....but they were not. They are TWO REAL PEOPLE ON THE RECORD (and current members of the US SOF) -
Now, before you start trying to tell others about what goes on at FR - First thing you need to understand is people actually READ on FR -
Again, you have now been proven a fool apprx a half dozen times - You are on the wrong side of history when it comes to Mr. Chalabi - (face it).
For the last time - There are dozens of SOF on the record citing Mr. Chalabi as not being trust worthy! - U.S. forces arrested Mr. Chalabi for giving info to Iran (and for having confidential information on him that he was not suppose to have).
These are not anonymous sources - What don't you understand about that - Was the US Military wrong to seize Mr. Chalabi? - Where they wrong to take away from him confidential US information that he was not suppose to have? - Were we wrong to vet him with false information only to see that information end up in Iran? -
Give me a break with your need for more sources. Do us all a favor go google some more names and then weirdly suggest they are really other people. I just have to say again, wow was that dumb!
Oh, good: then we won't have to hear any more from you.
When you can give a name for your friend's source, let us know and I'll stop calling it an anonymous source. Whether your friend worked with Chalabi at some point is irrevelant, because you yourself stated in Post 20, "It wasn't his team but two others that worked with Chalabi that said he was not to be trusted", so by your own account your friend was not a witness to what you are claiming he heard from others and transmitted to you. Citing Burns and Wurst as sources for your hearsay is fallacious: Burns and Wurst are sources for what Burns and Wurst state, not for what you state your friend told you. I asked you questions about Burns and Wurst--which you misconvey as statements, apparently because you are so desperate for a counterargument to distract from the exposure of your posts as hearsay--because unlike you I check the background of sources making controversial statements, and I am aware that there was a journalist named John Burns covering US military activity in Iraq during the time frame you mention who opposed Chalabi's contact with the New York Times, which you would know if you were as informed as you claim to be. Your misinformation on Chalabi and Iran is outdated, as you would also know if you were as informed as you claim to be. For someone who claims to work in security, you sure blab a lot about what you pretend is privately-shared information--I guess your security training doesn't include learning the basic concept of "need to know". Finally, no one who makes as many spelling and grammatical errors as you do and types something as silly as "weirdly suggest" every other sentence should call anyone else dumb.