What I said was that the allegations about specific sites on the ground where weapons development work was going on turned out not to be accurate. The example Teribus gave didn't actually constitute a counter-example.

The weapons inspectors have said that there are still questions to be asked, and that they need to take their time. There seems no reason why they shouldn't be given as much time as they feel is necessary. All right, it is no doubt expensive and inconvenient keeping an Armada ready to invade, but it will be even more expensive and inconvenient, especially for those who get killed. And it'd be just as expesnive and inconvenient maintaining the occupation force in Iraq assuming the invasion goes according to plan.

So far as I can see the only reason for pushing ahead at this stage, rather than in a year or two years, is that that could be politically awkward for Bush. Does anyone really beieve that that this should be allowed to have any significance at all in relation to war and peace?