Saddam never provided proof of the destruction of chemical and biological weapons. Why not?
Then, one must also believe that Blair and the British Intelligence service also lied.
Then, you must believe that not only did the President lie, but also Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and all the people under them, and not one person leaked.
Then, you must believe that the President and his co-conspirators acted knowing that they were lying, and took no notice of the fact that if weapons weren't found, idiots like you would whine and accuse them of lying.
And finally, if there were no WMD's in Iraq, what accounts for the mustard gas, mobile biological labs, radioactive drums, poison in the Euphrates River, atropine kits issued to Iraqi soldiers, barrels of pesticides (precursor chemicals) found in multiple sites, hollow warheads fitted for chemical usage, illegal missiles, and the like?
The most logical answer is that we simply haven't found the stuff yet. We will.
Another logical answer is that we have found the stuff, and are compiling the full report and assembling the evidence before letting it out for the world to see.