or not.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...t6.html?sub=AR
"The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.
"Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had 'progressively decayed' since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of 'concerted efforts to restart the program.'
"The findings were similar on biological and chemical weapons. While Hussein had long dreamed of developing an arsenal of biological agents, his stockpiles had been destroyed and research stopped years before the United States led the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Duelfer said Hussein hoped someday to resume a chemical weapons effort after U.N. sanctions ended, but had no stocks and had not researched making the weapons for a dozen years."
Is the silence on this report because it just confirms what all now admit? The administration's own report now shows (among other things) that Saddam had zero bio/chem stockpiles and was regressing, not progressing, on the nuclear front. This link is to an article -- but there are more analytical pieces in that edition too. "Gathering threat" my ass.
S_A_M
P.S. I would never say "Cheney Lied!", but he was, at the least, very seriously mistaken and does not wish to talk about it.
