not a big deal at all. it sounds like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which is the source of the article is trying to cover its butts. in jan 2003, they were only able to find 230 tons of this HMX which is a high explosive of potential use in nuclear weapons. not the 380 the liberal ny times rag references. where did this 150 tons suddently come from. sounds like the weapons inspectors weren't doing there job. and also i wonder how there could be dangerous weapons in iraq when liberals have been droning on for months about how saddam was such a good guy and had no intention of hurting america.
and i can't say it much better than the great mark levin: -- You know, if you study any war, including our most important wars -- especially the Civil War and World War II -- you understand why this is not an exceptional story. Wars are full of setbacks, and armies adapt to them. To hold a president personally accountable for every setback, as John Kerry has attempted throughout this campaign -- demanding that Bush explain what happened to these weapons -- is absurd. It's fair game for Kerry to raise it, it may well have some political resonance, but it's also fair game to label Kerry a demagogue when he does it. -- _______ List host: http://Kahunapule.org List info: http://RangerNet.org/faq.htm To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://RangerNet.org/subscribe.htm
