Ace_of_Spades_HQ-logo(100)Ace of Spade’s writers usually leave a mark, but this one leaves a huge chemical weapons-grade burn on the butt of progressives, who routinely, and with malice, caterwaul about “Bush’s lies” re the Iraq war – by actually lying.  Take their New York Times division as an example.

Despite What You May Have Read In The Papers, The Iraq War Was Not About An Active Weapons Program

The NYTimes has published a particularly despicable piece on the Iraq War. Here’s the link, if you must. Now, let me start by saying there are parts of this piece that are noteworthy, and those parts recount acts of valor and duty by U.S. service members. That’s not the despicable part. The despicable part is how the NYTimes writers have twisted what happened to these service members to their own end of rewriting the Iraq War.

According to the NYTimes, chemical weapons of mass destruction were indeed found in Iraq during the war, as has been a simmering, off-again-on-again open secret. But the NYTimes says these were not the chemical WMD that President Bush said would be found:

The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.

The New York Times found 17 American service members and seven Iraqi police officers who were exposed to nerve or mustard agents after 2003. American officials said that the actual tally of exposed troops was slightly higher, but that the government’s official count was classified.

The secrecy fit a pattern. Since the outset of the war, the scale of the United States’ encounters with chemical weapons in Iraq was neither publicly shared nor widely circulated within the military. These encounters carry worrisome implications now that the Islamic State, a Qaeda splinter group, controls much of the territory where the weapons were found.

The first sentence is an absolute lie, uttered at Bush 43’s expense, and made to justify the terrifying conclusion, laid at Obama’s feet, in the last sentence. …

Writer Gabriel Malor goes on to explain in detail, with actual, historic examples of Bush speeches, how the NYT lied today, in their effort to rewrite history, to the defend the lies actually told – by progressives.

Being a progressive is hard. All the lies.

Please spread this around!
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookPin on PinterestShare on RedditEmail this to someone