Deletion of Russia and Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq controversy (2nd nomination)

Comment: no serious evidence exists for any of the contentions made, and not a particularly notable theory - it's strung together here with , and I also agree with with smb's nom, and and Dhartung's  concerns above. Addressing it purely on a factual basis, several reports from a number of government investigative agencies (including in the US) have suggested the weapons either did not exist/were not developed, which instantly voids the question of who hid them
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: Crack-pot conspiracy theory that simply cannot be taken seriously even for a conspiracy theory. Perfect example of how NOT to write an article per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: POV fork of WMD theories in the aftermath of the 2003 Iraq War giving |undue weight to one particular theory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: Poorly sourced and thinly evidenced conspiracy theorists quoted out of context to build a |synthesis argument, and all this seems to be done to forward a particular political POV that is completely at odds with what the consensus of journalists, government investigators, intelligence agencies, and academics has concluded after extensive investigation
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)