I think that if it's legitimate, we'd be seeing more coverage on it. It would definitely trump the California recall results. Most major news networks would be rushing to print it so that they don't look like idiots after taking everything Bush said at face value at the beginning of the war.

If none of the other major news networks pick this up within a couple days, there's a reason for that, and it's probably that they either don't believe it's important (not likely) or they don't believe it's true.

I agree with that. I would guess (I say that because I obviously have no inside information from CIA, DIA or any other IA), two things:

1) If the networks had credible information from more than one non-political source, they would be all over it.

2) If there is credible information, it isn't being shared with the networks by whomever.

This strikes me as a pure political reaction to falling job ratings.

I actually hope they do find WMD's. It will make me feel a whole lot better about the war, the casualties and the effect on the economy.

Anyone catch Condoleeza Rice's speach about WMD's today? There is concrete evidence at this point that Saddam was concealing programs as well as dual use facilities. They were definitely in breach of the UN resolutions they had agreed to.

This is a paraphrased quote: "If this information had come to light the UN Security Council would have had to authorize the same course of action taken by the US and its allies."

Sure, on one hand it's political spin. On the other, there is quite a bit of substance here.

Ya know, prove it and I'll applaud. (see my last post).

Prior to the war, Colin Powell (a man I greatly admire) went before the UN with "proof" which was later refuted.

The chief inspector said last week that there was no evidence of WMD's or of any connection between Sadam and bin Laden.

I'd like some straight talk and some proof. And I'd like to have it verified or disproven by someone or some organization that is not beholden to either political party.

I agree, DeltAlum. We've seen allegations of "proof" that turned out to be fake way too many times in this investigation for me to believe it just like that. In fact, that is probably the biggest reason why the media is holding off on this story. They've been fooled too many times to just believe whatever the administration says on this subject.

There's only so many times you can cry wolf before people start to ignore you.

First, because she happened to state that there was concrete evidence doesn't make it fact.

Second, you say there is a lot of substance here, where is it? You didn't give us any substance or concrete evidence here. ;)

Oh, I'd love to point you all to a great article which exposes 10 lies the Bush Admin used to get you to support the war. (Rice is quoted as saying the only use of aluminum really is for producing uranium centrifuges. She did say this in a speech that was televised and quess what, it wasn't true=lies!!)

Ten Lies

Thank you Damasa for posting that.

I would like to point out that Clinton lied once and was impeached. Bush lies 10 times that we know of, but its OK. At least when Clinton boinked his intern no one died.

LMBO!!!!! :D :D
Too funny!

Clinton only lied once? When the WMD are found most of the 10 items on that list are out the window. If the Dems, thought they could go after Bush, they would.

Your assuming they will find something. If they haven't now I doubt they ever will unless Bush gets desperate, sneaks over some chemical weapons from the US and says it belongs to the Iraqis.

I'm basing my opinion on an interview I saw with U.S. Chief Weapons Inspector David Kay.

Yes who works for Bush at least indirectly. I am sure he says what he is told to say. It would work the same way which ever party was in office.

When the WMD are displayed to the American people, individuals who work for Bush, at least indirectly, will display them. Does that mean you won't accept the evidence? Kay and his team have discovered at least 17 labs. Many equipped with equipment banned by the UN. They have found banned bacteria for WMD that was never revealed or reported to the UN. They have found fuel that can only be used in outlawed missiles. Kay mentioned other evidence and testimony from Iraqi scientists in the interview that point to an ongoing weapons program.

Which is one of the most frustrating things. This is the same David Kay who JUST LAST WEEK said there was NO indication of WMD's or ties between the former regime and bin Laden. Just last week.

While I would love to be wrong (again, see posts above), this smacks of pure politics. Period.

Remember that these three people we've mentioned, Rice, Powell and Kay all have one thing in common. I try real hard not to say things that would embarass my boss either.

Let's get past the politics and see some proof.

The interview that I'm referring to is also from last week. Did you see him interviewed or did you read (or hear) about an interview or report in the media? In the interview I saw, Kay said he was amazed that the media is ignoring much of his report. I read an account in 2 major papers that seem to say the direct opposite of what Kay has actually said. I do not want to argue, I'm just interested in the interview that you saw.