sorry, man, i get no video. I assume it is the programme from last week though? my point is that the details of the munitions are vague as the report is still classified.
> Shooting our planes down... doesn't count, I guess all the resolutions wouldn't make a difference to you, Oil for Food, Planning to kill the president... move along... nothing to see here, look, glitter.
Huh? What prompted that?
> To make it very simple. IAEA didn't check places they should have, they said so in the Dueffer Report).
Is this in response to my question of where were these munitions found? I'm for answers to that, and if the answer/s are 'in the places the IAEA and ISG didn't look' then, great. But if the answers aren't going to be declassified then this story isn't going anywhere.
take it easy. i'm not issuing warnings to anyone. there just isn't enough in that one declassified page to guarantee this isn't going to be another disappointment.
> What's inconvenient for the democrats, and nobody talks about this, is that Richard Clarke and David Kay testified under oath that Saddam was 12 to 18 months away from having a nuclear weapon.
say what???? the Libs keep telling me that there was absolutely no evidence Iraq had a nuclear programme.
out of interest, why would Dick Clarke get involved in that? how would he have access to that info?
I'm afraid i think it's too early to get excited about this. Only one page of the report has been declassified by Negroponte, and that doesn't give us anything to base our case for invading on.
I see what you are saying but that just hasn't happened yet, so we don't have a strong enough case to get excited about. i'd hate to see us get buried if these '500 munitions' turn out to just the total of all the rotting degraded munitions found to date.