[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
My post in the other thread crossposted here:

counter,

As noted in your joke thread, the link is now working. The following excerpt covers the important issues in this:

The weapons are thought to be manufactured before 1991 so they would not be proof of an ongoing WMD program in the 1990s. But they do show that Saddam Hussein was lying when he said all weapons had been destroyed, and it shows that years of on-again, off-again weapons inspections did not uncover these munitions.

Hoekstra said the report, completed in April but only declassified now, shows that "there is still a lot about Iraq that we don't fully understand."

Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.

Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions.

"This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991," the official said, adding the munitions "are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war."

The official said the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein's intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq.


So to summarize:

1) WMDs have indeed been found.
2) They weren't in useable condition when found and were made prior to 1991.
3) Thus they aren't proof of an ongoing program at the time of invasion, but they ARE proof Saddam lied about not having any.
4) Their existance shows the dumass inspectors who later criticized the administration were incompetent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good summary Bluff, except it gives too much credibility to an unnamed DoD source who may or may not have seen the recently declassified information. His version and Santorums version are clearly different unless Santorum chose his words to Congress very poorly.

His website says hes on Hannity & Colmes tonight. I'll stay up and watch it and see how he responds.