[mattdono]

Exactly. I'm a little confused myself. I heard the President loud and clear say there was WMDs and they were concerned about them falling into terrorist's (any terrorist's) hands.

But, then, I remember the media and the democrats saying that the President lied and there weren't any WMDs and the threat of terrorists getting their hands on any WMDs was really just "concocted down in Texas".

So, there actually was WMDs?

But...wait...um, that would mean that the media and the democrats are LYING SCUM THAT ARE ACTIVELY WORKING AGAINST THEIR OWN COUNTRY JUST TO PURSUE A NARROW POLITICAL INTEREST.

Well, well. That's certainly enlightening. Maybe the media will now massively cover this story and admit that the President and the administration were right along on?

</sarcasm>

[ClancyJ]

Well, they are wrong - it could NOT be mustard or sarin because there are just not any there. Bush would have told us if there were mustard or sarin there. Afterall - the press would have told us and they said there was NONE THERE. Now fergit it!!!!!

[txradioguy]

"Maybe the media will now massively cover this story and admit that the President and the administration were right along on?"

I understand the sarcasm of your query. And I see what you mean. Good point. Unfortuneately the reality is that the "mainstream" media and even some naysayers among us will STILL continue to dismiss this revelation as "no solid proof" there were WMD's in Iraq.

Just a little mustard gas here people...nothing to see...move along.