[OnyxCougar]

Originally posted by tw
Is it corrupt to report that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction that could be launched in 45 minutes even though there was no evidence AND that Saddam acutally had no WMD? No. A reporter must report the news. He must report what, for example, the government official claims even if it is obviously or internal sources say it is not based on known facts.

That rediculous claim is from Tony Blair. The BBC demonstrated in details that this Tony Blair statment could not be supported by other sources. Furthermore, the BBC also noted how other Tony Blair claims were based upon absurd sources such as a graduate thesis. That the British government claims were even plagurized from that graduate paper - word for word complete with typographical mistakes. To provide perspective, the BBC noted how other claims were made without valid basis. As it turns out, the BBC was reporting correctly. Tony Blair was all but completely inventing those Saddam WMD claims.

Text from Mr. Blix's report to the UN. Emphais mine.

There is a significant Iraqi effort under way to clarify a major source of uncertainty as to the quantities of biological and chemical weapons which were unilaterally destroyed in 1991. A part of this effort concerns a disposal site, which was deemed too dangerous for full investigation in the past. It is now being re-excavated.

To date, Iraq has unearthed eight complete bombs, comprising two liquid-filled intact R-400 bombs and six other complete bombs. Bomb fragments are also found. Samples have been taken.

The investigation of the destruction site could, in the best case, allow the determination of the number of bombs destroyed at that site. It should be followed by serious and credible effort to determine the separate issue of how many R-400-type bombs were produced.

In this, as in other matters, the inspection work is moving on and may yield results.

Iraq proposed an investigation using advanced technology to quantify the amount of unilaterally destroyed anthrax dumped at a site. However, even if the use of advanced technology could quantify the amount of anthrax said to be dumped at the site, the results will still be open to interpretation. Defining the quantity of anthrax destroyed must of course be followed by efforts to establish what quantity was actually produced.

With respect to VX, Iraq has recently suggested a similar method to quantify VX precursors stated to have been unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991.

This is from the freaking inspectors. Iraq ADMITTED to MAKING THEM. ADMITTED to HAVING them. But for some reason, they can't find evidence to prove Iraq destroyed all of the amounts they SAID they HAD.

Have we found it yet? No. Does that mean it's not buried in the desert somewhere? No. That's a big freaking desert. When they can PROVE they destroyed all they said they had, I might believe they don't have them any more. But then, who says they reported all they had? But to ask me to swallow that Saddam's regime is being the slightest bit truthful when it comes to WMD .... come on. I was born on Wednesday, but not LAST Wednesday.

In addition this comes from this site regarding the report.

The United Nations Chief Weapons Inspector told UN officials, however, that three major issues still remain over Iraq:

1. How much illicit weapons material remains undeclared and in tact from before the Gulf War in 1991?

2. What, if anything, has been procured or produced?

Note it's not IF. It's HOW MUCH. Indeed.