So, where are(were) those WMDs?

[Occhidiangela]

Of course, I could always drag in the "absolute proof" of  the Iraqi weapons program as 'proof' that the administration is lying in much the same way  in which you decided to include Dan Rather; as a deliberate misdirection. 
[right][snapback]58923[/snapback][/right]

When I have looked at how the Iraqi's working on those programs mislead Saddam, or so some reports say, and our own weapons procurement shennanigans, for example the A-12 or the Comanche, where claims are made that are not backed up by performance, I start to see how certain elements of our security apparatus were able to, basically, talk themselves into believing what seemed most acceptable to them.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

Lie, jest, or simple myopia, the premise of a resurgent set of WMD programs appear to have fooled a hell of a lot more than a few spooks at Langley. Fooled me, based on the crap he kept pulling on the UN dudes.

I for one am not convinced that Pres Bush lied so much as believed something that was not as well supported by facts as he thought it was, and acted on it. That the soundbyte campaign leaned so heavily on the WMD issue to drum up support for the war is something he is going to have to live with forever: in some circles, his credibility cannot be restored, period.

Similarly, Secretary Powell lost quite a bit of street cred. Not to mention any number of our Senators, and quite a few of our Allies' leaders.

Occhi