Is this thing valid at all?

[Archae]

Some Freeper-type I spar with posted this to "prove the UN knew Saddam had WMD."

http://www.alphapatriot.com/home/archives/2004/07/13/un_admits_saddam_had_wmd.html

I know it's from a far-right :tinfoilhat: type of website, but does anyone have any links to a site that debunks it?

[TrogL]

1. So where is it?

Iraq's been gone over with a fine-pick comb.

Nothing's been found.

[Rabrrrrrr]

2. Since the only "facts" it offers is an article at what appears to be a

rightwing Jewish site, and since the article you posted seems to be laden with the style of a typical mouth-foamer, I don't put much stock in it.

But, he was right about one thing - and he should have the fuller truth in his article. Saddam definitely DID have WMD at some time.

He held them for a while after George HW Bush sold them to him to use on his own people with Bush's blessings.

[Rabrrrrrr]

3. And that's not even to mention this other bit of stupidity

that this idiot is pissed off that Saddam moved all the WMDs. So, then, in truth, there were no WMDs is all I can figure out.

I guess we should have realized that when Shrubbie McCokeSpoon says "Saddam had weapons of WMD" what he meant was, not when we went to war, but back a few years ago, before Saddam GOT RID OF ALL HIS WMDs.

That's the real stupidity of this guy's argument - either the weapons are still there, nullifying his argument; or the WMDs aren't there because Saddam moved them, in which case, the reason and need for the invasion goes again back to null.

[komplex]

4. Just post to the Hans Blix UN speech.

That's all.