Reply to comment

LW makes an interesting and valid points. On WMD there is much heat and very little light on the issue. The basic facts are in a way simple. We knew Saddam had WMD when the UN inspectors left in 1998. If he had them in 1998 he must still of had them in 2002, and Blix in his reports to the UNSC gave a long list of unaccounted for material. Thus when both the President and the Prime Minister stated that 'Saddam still pocessed WMD' they told a truth, not a lie. It was the truth as they both knew it to be at the time. Peversely it would have been a lie if they had both said 'Saddam has no WMD', because we all knew in 1998 he still had the stuff, thus it is reasonable to assume he still had it in 2002. Also it is asserted that the President lied about Saddams attempt to obtain uranium. In the Butler report he said this -: "We conclude that, on the basis of the intelligence assessments at the time, covering both Niger and the Democratic Republic of Congo, the statements on Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa in the Government's dossier, and by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons, were well-founded. By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that 'The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa' was well-founded." Again, the President did not lie. He merely said something with which many of you disagree. Not the samething.