Actually, propaganda can be something that is factually TRUE as well. There were eyewitness accounts about the shredders from multiple sources. That is "evidence". Maybe not hard enough for you, but what can you expect in a country like Saddams Iraq?
Sure, there are a thousand different conceivable scenarios that would explain why there is no evidence. But that is true of virtually any assertion.
But there were eyewitness accounts, its not just an assertion. What made them believable is that people KNEW the nature of Saddams regime. Its like, if another woman had said that Clinton had an affair with her, and she had a friend that corroborated the story, one might tend to believe it because of Clintons KNOWN nature.
I could claim that Bush did indeed plant the shredder; what would you do? Demand proof of course. As you should.
Well sure, just show how he traveled back in time. Show me a few witnesses who saw him back in 1996 in Iraq..
People making reports of such does in fact = "evidence". What do you mean by "without evidence"?
Let's posit the shredding machine never is found. Do you concede that the tales of tongues and limbs being hacked off before crowds has been thoroughly documented via videotape that has been shown on tv? If the machine story turns out to be a hyperbolic invention from desperate people in order to get us in to help them from atrocities that were beyond any doubt occurring, do you then say we went in under false pretenses because one form of torture on the list of many documented did not exist?