Look Who it Was Random video

ISIL Loots WMD in Iraq and Media Ignorance Ensues

2,552 views · Published 1 July 2014 · 4:01 · Indexed 27 October 2026

Channel: Representative Press ☞ · 2014 · News & Politics

Watch on YouTube

How many times are we going to get this ignorant reaction ...?
550 Metric Tons of Yellowcake, what about it? 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEGM-9yzCPc&list=PLuf794ZZ4y0sbn8IOcn1Hp4PalONyhmFL

She Tweets Serious Allegation, THEN She Claims RT "faked the translation"! 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWSDbu0qoWg&list=PLfrlsC1yJ2dQfgAC5oaG6bv_GUcneCMz1

Not Just *****, Iraq War Lies BIG too! Parts 1 -2 and more videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIeYAGkdy7o&index=1&list=PL6BBE308B0AA273F0

She's right, there's still a lot of confusion about WMD in Iraq.
For a change of pace here's White House spokesperson Jen Spaki getting it right. Don't be shocked by that because these facts aren't complicated, the sad thing is even after she explains the situation to this reporter he still doesn't get it.
Back to Iraq.
Mm-hmm.
Is there any comment about the discovery of Sunni extremists taking over Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons facility?
So I know there's been a lot of confusing information about this. Let me speak to that if I can. One moment. We're certainly concerned about ISIL seizing this complex. But let me be clear on what this is: This material that is there dates from the 1980s. It's been stored in the bunker since the dismantlement efforts in the 1990s, and reinforced by the UN Monitoring, Inspection, and Verification commitment in the 2000s. And it contains two bunkers that hold degraded chemical remnants, which don't include intact chemical weapons -- and there certainly is a difference -- and would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely use this for military purposes or, frankly, to move it.
So we're certainly concerned, but I think the context of what this is and what this is not is incredibly important here as we assess the concern.
I thought Saddam Hussein didn't have chemical weapons.
Well, this is a complex that has some remnants from back in the '80s that we've known about for some time, so it wasn't a new piece of information.
So you think it is not harmful?
It is -- it poses serious health hazards to anyone attempting to access the bunkers and that is certainly the case, but these are not intact chemical weapons, and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to use them in a military capacity.
This reporter is apparently confused about the fact that Saddam did cooperate with UN inspectors and that the UN placed the weapons of mass destruction that he declared as part of the disarmament efforts under seal. It 's amazing how many people don't understand that point including reporters who should know better. How many times are we going to get this ignorant reaction from people who are shocked when some group raids a facility that was previously monitored by the UN before the Iraq War?
 "Yes, please. The same issue. I mean, so you think -- your assessment or you understand that this is -- it is not harmful?" EDITED to "So you think it is not harmful?"

"The Iraq Study group did find chemical munitions at Muthanna but determined that inspections by United Nations Special Commission, or Unscom, had ensured the facility was dismantled and remaining chemical stocks militarily useless and sealed in bunkers."
http://online.wsj.com/articles/sunni-extremists-in-iraq-occupy-saddams-chemical-weapons-facility-140

More from this channel