October 06, 2004


That was a surprise - the official and final Iraq Survey Group report into Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction says ... he had none! This is exactly what those of us against the war have been saying for two bloody years. No chemical weapons, no biological weapons, no nuclear weapons. Not even the capability to produce them. In fact almost ever single piece of 'evidence' presented to the UN before Parliament and the UN has turned out to be what we knew it was - a big, fat, whopping lie.

What Saddam did have though, apparently, was the 'mind' to produce WMDs should UN sanctions ever be lifted. So that's what the war was about all along - Saddam's thought crime. Here was me thinking it was all about oil. My apologies Tony. Although I suspect it went something like this:

US interrogator: "Saddam did you want to produce WMDs?"
Saddam: "No"
US interrogator: Wack
Saddam: "Yes, yes I wanted them"
US interrogator: "Case closed"

Having had his reason for going to war obliterated you would have though Tony would be apologetic too. Absolutely not - in fact he's been as obstinate and sanctimonious as ever, claiming Saddam's thought crime was justification enough. Tony says sanctions weren't working but that's exactly what they were doing. If Saddam really did desperately want WMDs sanctions, yet had none, what do you think was stopping him, good manners?.

Yet, Tony's ever changing isn't he:

April 2003 - "Sanctions are working"
Sept. 2003 - "We're 45 mins from certain doom"
Dec. 2003 - "Saddam can stay if he destroys his WMDs, we're not after regime change"
April 2004 - "Regime change has justified the war"
Oct. 2004 - "Saddam thought bad things, he's an eeeevil man"

Unless we get rid of this pompous bastard and his dog trainer George Bush we can expect Iran, Syria and anyone else who's got oil and is slightly brown to be next on the hitlist. Evidence won't matter. This IS about regime change.