Thursday, 2 October 2003 - 9:33 PM CDT

Yeah, you?re right. We on the left do say that the weapons case against Iraq was always weak and that we said so all along. This is a link to the best point-by-point examination of all the major claims against Iraq:

http://www.middleeastreference.org.uk/iraqweapons.html

You can go there, find most of what you cite, and see the dispassionate truth about each point. No one on the left needs to ?lie? to embarrass Bush ?- he?s doing a fine job of that himself.

The way I see it, there are three kinds of WMD information that the administration promoted in the run-up to the war ? (1) Claims that were true about Iraq some time in the past, chiefly the 1980s, but always leaving out the facts of scandalous U.S. support; (2) Claims that had current merit, but were ?sexed up? to the worst possible extent; and (3) Outright fraud, like the uranium claim.

Why all this WMD eagerness about Iraq last year although countries like North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan have much more serious rogue weapons programs? Well, the administration needed a way to take Iraq, a country they have wanted for years -- with a semi-legal justification -- and to instill visions of mushroom clouds in public minds in order to get your support for the operation. You should feel used.

I would argue that David Kay is doing about as well as the UNMOVIC inspectors. Only in the latter case, we could have had the same results -- if UNMOVIC had been given the "time" you now say Dr. Kay requires -- without a costly (lives & treasure) invasion, conquest, and occupation.

Thursday, 2 October 2003 - 10:36 PM CDT

" dual-use facilities and equipment ready for conversion to outlawed toxins and chemicals... actively engaged in the potential manufacture of and high-level preparations for using mustard gas, botulo-toxins, and wacked-out sounding viruses. "

Welcome to America sport. Can I get you some Kool-Aid?