doublegunshop.com - home Forums NY Times admits Iraq had WMD'S after all !

CHemical weapons by defintion and as recognised by the UN....are considered WMD's. They were found years ago months after we went into Iraq.

A number of publications DID report it back then....but the left refused to believe anything but offical Party Propaganda distributed by Pravda ( currently known as the NYT and Washington COMmpost)

WHat proof more do you need this is the NYT OWN webiste.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/...apons.html?_r=1

IF you bleived them before...you better believe them now...lest you be a hypocrit by believing only what you want when it agrees with what you believe.

I've been saying the proof was already known long before I even joined this site. Now the lefty press is finally admitting it publically that they were lying all along.

Ken, none of your above contradicts spin for US embarrassment, Iraq panic with barbarians at its gates, or disappearance of the Iraqi army.

The Maliki debacle followed US getting rid of the Iraqi army after shock and awe, and the US hand-picked Maliki feeding fat on tribal vengeance. History.

Fast forward to public opinion wanting US forces out of there, Obama obliging until the beheadings and now public opinion forced him to send them back.

For the longest war in US history.

Timothy McVeigh's chemicals in a rental truck was a WMD?

The NYT story you posted was discussed here earlier at length. Nowhere does the story refer to the discovery as WMDs. No one can show where it does.

Please read C.J. Chivers report in its entirety. Please reference where he said it was a WMD discovery.

Please disclose why you believe the NYT "admitted it was lying all along."

Less chattering here and more thinking, please.

Now you're making me feel like poop. By the way, seeing as how I can't figure out links, did you have the chance to look up the definition of 'work place vio....'scratch that, wmd on wikipedia. Hey King, what does isis stand for, or is that taboo because the pres has stricken it from the sacred scrolls of....scratch that too. Heck this is misfires, so you can type radical islamic militants without getting booted from the country club, or can you?

From a neutral source;


With Iraq�s WMD programs being found by U.S. soldiers, according to a recent New York Times report, many conservatives are claiming former President George W. Bush was right to take out Saddam Hussein. But this reaction to the article has already triggered a debate, with progressives arguing over the word �active.�

In a related report by The Inquisitr, it�s been reported that ISIS terrorists may have used chemical weapons on the Kurds in Syria.

According to the report, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, and it�s believed at least 17 American military service members were exposed to Iraq�s WMDs after 2003. Retired Army major Jarrod Lampier was present when one of the largest chemical weapon stockpiles was unearthed and he says, �I love it when I hear, �Oh there weren�t any chemical weapons in Iraq.� There were plenty.

he Conservative Tribune claims this �first sentence is nothing short of a lie� and insists George W. Bush �never posited the existence of an �active� program.� Instead, it�s claimed Bush�s warnings over Iraq�s WMD programs were true.

�But the best evidence that Bush never made such a claim comes from The Times itself, not in what the article says, but in what it does not say. If Bush had argued for the existence of an �active� WMD program as justification for the invasion of Iraq, you can be sure that they would have quoted him. The fact that they don�t is strong evidence that they cant. !

http://www.inquisitr.com/1543109/iraq-wm...m0cQQXjIa8dr.99

Let's see if I understand this:
Everyone but the commited Libtards here understands that chemical weapons as used against the Kurds in Iraq are WMDs. However; if the N Y Times didn't specifically use that term there not WMDs.
If someone who has converted to Islam is running around a business shouting Islamic phrases while beheading a fellow worker isn't labeled a terrorist because the idiot occupying the White House doesn't want to offend the "peaceful" Muslims it's NOT terrorism.
Does anyone with an iota of common sense wonder why I maintain that Libtards occupy a parallel universe? Adolf Hitler lived in his own parallel universe from about 1939 until the bitter end. Hopefully we won't suffer as dire consequences due to having our own nutjob in charge.
3 more weeks and hopefully the insanity of the last 6 years will begin to reverse!

In three more weeks, anticipating winning Senate, Republicans will have to show they can govern for win in '16. It will be a different Congress.

Jim, NYT terminology isn't the issue. It's your claiming what it did when it didn't. Not the first time you let one off coming out of the holster.

Dave, there are no neutral sources. Some information sources are more reliable than others. Humans make the words. For all their strivings for objectivity, human nature makes it impossible. They decide what's in and left out of the story. Editors are the second line of defence for fairness. C.J. Chivers is a distinguished journalist, his newspaper one of most respected in the world. Your sources wouldn't rate a mention for responsible journalism. Look 'em up.

the NYT is losing readers-AND employees becuse of its liberal slant,YOU LOOK IT UP King !

here is another

Al Qaeda in Iraq Seizes Saddam�s WMD Facility

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/al-qaeda-in-iraq-seizes-saddams-wmd-facility/

But don�t worry, Obama has announced he�s dispatching Kerry to talk to people in the Middle East so it�s a race between which set of poison gasses will be emitted first.

Sunni extremists in Iraq have occupied what was once Saddam Hussein�s premier chemical-weapons production facility, a complex that still contains a stockpile of old weapons, State Department and other U.S. government officials said.


Here�s the CIA report�

Numerous bunkers, including eleven cruciform shaped bunkers were exploited. Some of the bunkers were empty. Some of the bunkers contained large quantities of unfilled chemical munitions, conventional munitions, one-ton shipping containers, old disabled production equipment (presumed disabled under UNSCOM supervision), and other hazardous industrial chemicals.

And there are more details here...

Although the damaged Bunker 13 at Muthanna contained thousands of sarin-filled rockets, the presence of leaking munitions and unstable propellant and explosive charges made it too hazardous for UNSCOM inspectors to enter. Because the rockets could not be recovered safely, Iraq declared the munitions in Bunker 13 as �destroyed in the Gulf War� and they were not included in the inventory of chemical weapons eliminated under UNSCOM supervision.

Liberal and common sense are two words that don't go together Jim,like experimental and aircraft

Not King like to tout the deaths in Iraq under his "punks game" blame bush rants but under obame ?

The 12-Year War: 73% of U.S. Casualties in Afghanistan on Obama's Watch

Twelve years ago today, nineteen al Qaeda terrorists hijacked four U.S. commercial airliners and flew them into the World Trade Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania.

In the war that Congress authorized against al Qaeda only three days after that attack, the vast majority of the U.S. casualties have occurred in the last four and a half years during the presidency of Barack Obama.

In fact, according to the CNSNews.com database of U.S. casualties in Afghanistan, 73 percent of all U.S. Afghan War casualties have occurred since Jan. 20, 2009 when Obama was inaugurated.

The 91 U.S. casualties in Afghanistan so far in 2013 are more than those that occurred in the first two full calendar years of the war (2002 and 2003) combined, when 30 and 31 U.S. troops were killed there.

On Sept. 14, 2001, Congress approved a resolution authorizing the president �to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.�

By October 2001, U.S. forces were engaged in Afghanistan, seeking to remove al Qaeda from the sanctuary it had used there to launch the Sept. 11, 2001 attack.

Since then, most of the leaders and participants in the 9/11 terrorist attacks have been killed or captured. But the United States not only remains at war in Afghanistan, it continues to suffer significant casualties there.

In total, 2,144 U.S. military personnel have given their lives fighting in and around Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.

1,575 of the U.S. military personnel who have sacrificed their lives in this cause were killed during the presidency of Barack Obama.

That means 73 percent of the casualties in the Afghan War have happened on Barack Obama�s watch.("look it up King")