"You think it's quite okay to go to war by putting Saddam in a prove-you-don't-have-it-trick-bag but when I use the very same tactic on you you can't handle it???? "

If you really do not understand the difference as I have * pointed * it out, I am sorry for you- I pity the mentally handicapped.

If you are intentionally lying and trying to equate your unsubstantiated claim as being on the same order as the UN reports that had Saddam having the material as late as 1999, you are intentionally misleading us- What you accuse Bush of as "lying"

Are YOU telling us that the earlier UN reports were false?

Shall I call you Bushbert, for your choice of comment?

" the items HAD been in existance, and Blix was asking that Saddam prove that he, Saddam HAD done something with it- IN OTHER WORDS, that Saddam prove what he said. If you were capable of reading the text of the Jan 27th report, you might even be aware of the specific items that Saddam had, and was responsible for proving the disposition of.


ONLY those who are ignorant of the UNR say that it is asking Saddam to prove a negative. "

So, being so ignorant of the UNR, no wonder you stated:"Here's 89 cents... Take it and all the UN resolutions combined to your local Kwik-Mart for a 12 ounce cup of coffee..."


So, without the UNR, I guess the US can act as it sees in its own interest, and you will shut the fuck up about it?