The photo of the eyedroppers sent a chill up my spine.

“A former American overseer of Iraqi prisons says several dozen inmates who were members of Saddam Hussein’s military and intelligence forces boasted of helping transport weapons of mass destruction to Syria and Lebanon in the three months prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Don Bordenkircher – who served two years as national director of prison and jail operations in Iraq– told WND that about 40 prisoners he spoke with “boasted of being involved in the transport of WMD warheads to Syria.”
A smaller number of prisoners, he said, claimed “they knew the locations of the missile hulls buried in Iraq.”

Hey!

I’ve got an idea.

Let’s go dig them up!

We have occupied the country for five years and will likely do so for another 20-50 so it isn’t as if we can’t go where we like.

Unless, of course, Bordenkircher was inventing.

http://www.ctc.usma.edu/harmony/pdf/Sinjar_2_July_23.pdf

Which is why no one will ever convince me that WMD did not exist. And they try to qualify that statement with a parsed meaning of WMD. How can you not consider the stashes we have documented retrieving, mounted on the prosribed Samud missiles Saddam possesses after 1998 as a WMD atop a missile?? I guess they prefer to define it as nuke only, and bioweaponry doesn’t count. Altho Saddam’s nuke program was alive and well… under the radar level…. ready to be reconstituted at first opportunity.

Sadly, the western media shunned Sada’s book release, and his statements, by virtually ignoring his presence. He did not want to write that book, but was pressured into it by those who wanted the truth, as he knew it to be, laid out for the world to see. The man really preferred to lay low. Tho Amazon ranks it as #17 in the Iraq history sellers, I suspect more read a romance novel or fiction spy thriller than read real history. It goes against the grain of what has been pounded into our heads. But I, for one, would love to see a Hollywood reenactment movie made. A “true to the book” account, of course…. should such a critter exist.

BTW, are you aware that Sada’s brother is the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad? This man is not removed from the internal contacts between these countries. Sada, in the book, made a personal plea for his brother to come clean. He has not done so, of course (talk about a short lifespan in the wake….) But Syria and Israel have taken notable diplomatic steps to reconcile differences in the past year.

I’ll wager that history has far more to shed on Dubya’s term and legacy than we shall ever find in today’s media. Perhaps we will not live to see it… but our kids and grandkids will.

It’s called the faux-liberal timeline of history

You mean while the US was doing all that wonderful multilateral diplomacy at the UN, Saddam was using that time to prepare for war? My God, who could have thought of that!

Silent E already put up an abbreviated Scramble back at my main site that can’t be missed, but I don’t leave until o-light-hundred (6 am Central) Wednesday. I may as well combine the two…

I’ll leave you to decide which…..

I am NOT at all a fan of World Net Daily, but I can vouch for Ryan Mauro’s piece

This is part of the problem, Scott. Until journalists in the mainstream start talking about it in the New York Times, 60 Minutes, etc., there will not be any significant challenge to the established mainstream “no wmd found” narrative, save perhaps 50 years down the road, by historians. Openly partisan sources will always have the credibility challenge, other than with the amen chorus.

The fact that you’re a Democrat gives you a default credibility the rest of us lacks in the eyes of knee-jerk Republican rejectionists; the fact that you blog here at Flopping Aces, takes it away.

I’m not saying at all, that putting the information out there, even from partisan sources, doesn’t create inroads; but it’s difficult to do so, as it’s easier for partisans to attack and reject the news source than it is for them to examine the content for any validity to the claims. Hence why it is usually preferable to cite from the mainstream whenever possible (except FOX News, which is mainstream, but in the eyes of political opponents, held suspect).