And the point is that there was no danger in any of this material, right? Or are you saying that it was dangerous, and we were correct in invading? Con't have it both ways.


Or is it dangerous in terrorist hands, but not in Saddam's?

I did read the article- unlike the previous refernce, which was declared to be of not value, and the facts could not even be discussed, because it was from a conservative site. Same facts as presented here, so.... They can't really be valid, I guess.