If someone pointed an UNLOADED gun at you, wouldn't you make the assumption that it had bullets in it? Wouldn't it be in your best interest to error on the side of caution? By not PROVING he had no WMD, he was pointing a gun at the US. We had to assume it had bullets in it. He gave us no other choice.
Does that make it reasonable to go kill my neighbor because I am told he has a gun and might use it on me to do harm, even though he denies having a gun and I haven't seen one? Could you prove that you have no gun to point at me, and would you be willing to let me relentlessly and continuously search the most private parts of your home to satisfy my fear that you do? Think about it from outside the box of what we've been told for a while. The inability to produce these weapons, the ones that are supposedly present in such HUGE quantities, makes me re-examine everything I've been told all along with a very cynical eye and ear.
If the administration wants me to believe they have told me the truth, they can present the evidence I was told would be there as proof. That's all I'm asking. I think it is a reasonable request. If they were wrong, if they acted on intelligence lies, they need to admit that, and then go after those who misled us into a war with Iraq with the same vigor with which we went after Saddam.