Right, and I shouldn't have said "so many." The big contradiction is that we've got documents that talk about WMD and that they had WMD.
But the contradiction is the only story the AP reported on about the document release, which was the "poor Saddam" story about translated tapes where he and other senior officials were talking about how they had no WMD but the US didn't believe them.
With Powerline and Hugh Hewitt both on this, I went back to see how many views this article had:
March 2003 Top Secret Memo: TRANSFER OF SPECIAL AMMUNITION (POTENTIAL CHEMICAL WEAPONS) Translation
Posted by jveritas
On News/Activism 04/17/2006 11:40:37 AM EDT · 246 replies · 5,997+ views
Nearly 6,000 people have seen this translation! That's pretty darn significant.
Way to go jveritas - the word is getting out!
Oh man, just getting ready for nighty night and you had to mention the "poor Saddam" story and get me all PO'd again :)
If I am not mistaken, I read that document that the MSM was discussing. It was posted already translated to English. It wasn't about not having WMD.
Saddam's regime was always trying to satisfy all remaining issues that the UN inspectors had. In this case, the UN inspectors were wanting the Hussein regime to account for a batch of chemical weapons in which they had knowledge of the export of the precursors to Iraq from companies in the USA and the E.U.
The Hussein regime had used the chemical weapons against Iran and could not tell that to the UN inspectors. So their dilemma was that the UN inspectors could look for 50 years and never find them because the did not have them.
And that is true, they (Hussein regime) no longer had that particular batch of chemical weapons. The MSM was very misleading with that article. And any article that the MSM discusses about the documents and does not give the document number is VERY suspect. This being a case in point.
Do not look for the MSM to be anything but 100% dishonest with these documents.