Wednesday, March 03, 2004

What the hell...!

USA Today | U.N.: Iraq had no WMD after 1994
A report from U.N. weapons inspectors to be released today says they now believe there were no weapons of mass destruction of any significance in Iraq after 1994, according to two U.N. diplomats who have seen the document.

... The report, to be outlined to the U.N. Security Council as early as Friday, is based on information gathered over more than seven years of U.N. inspections in Iraq before the 2003 war, plus postwar findings discussed publicly by Kay.

Kay reported in October that his team found "dozens of WMD-related program activities" that Iraq was required to reveal to U.N. inspectors but did not. However, he said he found no actual WMDs.
Well, obviously, all we had to do was ask Sean Penn: He knew it all along.

Am I the only one who can tell the difference between "We haven't found them", "He didn't have them", and "He never had them"?

We know he had them at one point: He used them. I don't see any mention of finding evidence of the destruction of what we know he had. Is it possible that the reason he only used them to the extent he did was that he ran out?

If he did exactly as the U.N. resolutions required him to, except for that trivial afterthought of documenting his actions to the U.N.'s satisfaction, then why did he continue to act as guilty as homemade sin? Were we "punk'd"?

Can you tell I've had it up to here with "Bush lied"? | President Delivers "State of the Union" (2003)
Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning.
Where does it say Saddam is sitting there with his finger on a nuke button? Where's the lie? What did Bush describe that wasn't found?

No comments: