Posted by Curt on 2 September, 2013 at 10:14 pm. 43 comments already!



The media is fond of saying, without question, that there were no WMDs found in Iraq.

This has always been untrue and easily refuted, if media did anything other than parrot the party line.

The question isn’t about whether there were WMDs. The question has been how have we been letting the media get away with mistating the facts for all these years when ample evidence was there.

As the military reported, after we went into Iraq, chemical weapons, facilities and residue were in fact found, and kept being found for years afterward.

Via NY Post from 2010:

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons arsenal — most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

Note here that the present DNI James Clapper said in 2007 that much of the WMDs in Iraq had in fact been shipped to Syria.

This article notes in detail some of the shipments, that were in fact done with the assistance of Russia:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x