I love it, that direct on-the-ground reporting from the location of the alleged events is "conspiracy-like". I suspect I've rethought my "position" a lot more than you have.
You may want to look into media bias and the One America News Network. I suspect you haven't rethought your position at all, and rather parrot the position you see on the media you consume. Think outside the box.
OMG I had literally never heard of OANN until referred there by some leftists I follow. They hate MSNBC too. You can't even see the box. You actually believe that it's "right wing" to be skeptical of excuses for war. I am a pacifist who is against all USA military violence of the last several decades. This has been a journey for me, since after all I did vote to re-elect Bush the Lesser. Fool me once.
Leave all that aside. The way to contradict an on-the-ground report the bias of which is obvious and unacceptable to you, is to show us an on-the-ground report that contradicts it, the bias of which is more acceptable to you. This has the benefit of being less insulting than shallow assumptions about my media habits, oh and also it has the benefit of making any logical sense whatsoever, in contrast to the three sentences of meaningless pablum we see here.
However, Iraq WMD's were all reported by legitimate news sources at the time. Sometimes in the present, it is never clear as to what may or not be ultimately revealed.