Some ‘pundits’ are quite reliably wrong

ralphwiggums

And Jeffrey Goldberg is one of them:

Then the UN did this:

Bunker #13 and # 41 were closed by sealing all entrances before the end of CDG [Chemical Destruction Group] mission. Each seal consisted of two brick walls with a 5cm layer of tar between them. Then a third brick wall at a distance of one metre from the second wall was built and the space between them was filled with reinforced concrete. Altogether, such a seal was over 1.5 m thick. The hole in the roof of the bunker #13 was also sealed with reinforced concrete.

So yes, there were still chemical weapons in Iraq when we invaded in 2003. But no, today’s news doesn’t prove “Iraq had WMD.” Everyone on earth had known what was in these bunkers for 20 years, and Saddam had no way of accessing it.

Moreover, even if Saddam had gotten his hands on it everything had likely decayed so quickly that by the mid-nineties or earlier it would have been useless. By now it’s certainly more of a danger to ISIS than anyone else, and then probably only if they drink it.

All of this information is available to anyone with an internet connection and the slightest interest in this subject. That apparently does not include Jeffrey “I’ve Had My Entire Cerebrum Removed” Goldberg.

One thought on “Some ‘pundits’ are quite reliably wrong

  1. The Zionist neo-cons want so badly to be proven correct that their illegal invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do that they’ll keep on lying. The facts be damned. But that’s what warmongers do. They create conflict where none exists by lying through their teeth. About everything. Cheney, Netanyahu, Clinton and the rest.

Comments are closed.