Here's more proof that Dubya and the peanut gallery are a bunch of liars...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iraq had no stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons and its nuclear program had decayed before last year's U.S.-led invasion, the chief U.S. weapons inspector said on Wednesday, in findings contrary to prewar assertions of the Bush administration.
President Bush had cited a growing threat from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction as one of the main reasons for overthrowing Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Despite the new findings and a growing Iraqi insurgency, Bush told a campaign rally on Wednesday the war was justified.
"I still do not expect that militarily significant WMD stocks are cached in Iraq," Charles Duelfer, the CIA special adviser who led the hunt for unconventional weapons, said in testimony to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee.
He said Iraq's nuclear weapons program had deteriorated since the 1991 Gulf War, after which U.N. weapons inspectors were in Iraq, but Saddam did not abandon nuclear ambitions.
"The analysis shows that despite Saddam's expressed desire to retain the knowledge of his nuclear team, and his attempts to retain some key parts of the program, during the course of the following 12 years (after 1991) Iraq's ability to produce a weapon decayed," Duelfer said.
Some chemical weapons were uncovered in postwar Iraq but they all predated the 1991 Gulf War, Duelfer said. His report said Iraq had destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile in 1991 and there was no evidence that it resumed production.
Iraq also appears to have destroyed its stocks of biological weapons in 1991 and 1992, but if it decided to restart that program it could have produced mustard agent in months and nerve agent in less than a year, Duelfer said.
Iraq's arms capability has been a prominent campaign issue for the Nov. 2 U.S. presidential election, with Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry saying Bush rushed to war without allowing U.N. inspections enough time to investigate Iraq's armaments.
Duelfer's report "is a very significant commentary on the mistaken case for war presented by this administration," Mike McCurry, a senior Kerry adviser, told reporters in Colorado.
Bush said in a speech in Pennsylvania that the concern was that terrorists would get banned weapons from Saddam.
"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to ****networks," Bush said. "In the world after September the 11th, that was a risk we could not afford to take," he said.
A persistent insurgency in postwar Iraq has targeted U.S.-led forces, foreign workers, and Iraqi civilians involved in forming a new government, with bombings and kidnappings. More than 1,000 U.S. soldiers have died since the invasion.
CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Duelfer said that since he last briefed the U.S. Congress in March, a risk had emerged that chemical weapons experts from Saddam's former regime could have linked up with insurgents fighting the U.S.-led forces in Iraq.
"I believe we got ahead of this problem through a series of raids throughout the spring and summer," he said.
On what has been a contentious issue, Duelfer's report said there was no evidence that Iraq sought uranium from abroad after 1991.
Bush in his State of the Union speech before the war had said Iraq had been seeking to buy uranium from Africa. It was later discovered that the claim was based partly on fake documents.
The Duelfer report said Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the Gulf war, and there was no evidence of concerted efforts to restart it.
White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice had evoked in 2002 a potential nuclear threat when she said: "We don't want 'the smoking gun' to be a mushroom cloud."
A shipment of aluminum tubes seized in 2001 had been cited by U.S. officials as key evidence that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program. However, Duelfer said, "those tubes were most likely destined for a rocket program."
The WMD hunt uncovered labs run by Iraqi intelligence that showed production of small amounts of poisons, including ricin -- but for use in assassinations, not military weapons.
The Duelfer report, which includes assessments based on FBI interrogations of Saddam, said the former Iraqi leader intended to rebuild his weapons capabilities once U.N. sanctions were lifted.
and this is exactly how americans can read and articLe in a biased newspaper and think that they're getting real news.
THERE WAS A REASON WHY THE DULFER REPORT IS SUCH A BIG FUSS ALTHOUGH THEY DIDN'T FIND THE WMDs! :idea:
Also, in order to learn there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction, all you had to do was watch the Presidential debate. Bush admitted there were no weapons. The only thing Bush went off of, was that there was significant information which led he and his intelligence team to believe there were weapons in Iraq. Now I don't like Bush, I can't stand Bush, but I think he was justified in going to war with Iraq, but I don't feel he did it as a last resort though. Basically, he was thinking under the mentality of get them before they get you. I also feel he was under extreme pressure from the American people and those on his advisory boards. Because I know that if there were weapons, and Bush decided not to act, people would still be up in arms and be angry with him. So I think it was a lose-lose situation, because lives are being lost and would have been lost no matter what choice he decided to make.
THERE WAS A REASON WHY THE DULFER REPORT IS SUCH A BIG FUSS ALTHOUGH THEY DIDN'T FIND THE WMDs! :idea: 
