Bill Hobbs on weapons of mass destruction:

Something struck me upon re-reading the transcript of President Bush's Address to the United Nations General Assembly - his mentioning of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction programs without mentioning the lack, so far, of finding big caches of such weapons in liberated Iraq (at least that has been revealed publicly).

...Does [he] sound to you like a president who thinks there is the slightest chance we won't eventually prove beyond a shadow of Howard Dean's doubt the existence of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? Not at all. It sounds to me as if President Bush is absolutely sure - most likely based on intel and still-classified evidence - that weapons not only existed before the war, but exist today, and that it is only a matter of time before the proof and the weapons are revealed.

Commenter Dave Sheridan adds that he anticipates a widely visible revelation next spring. I've believed for some time now that the White House is quietly watching the historical record fill up with its opponents' insistence on an absence of bio-chem-atomics and relevant programs in Ba'athist Iraq.

With Kay to reveal his findings soon, we may witness certain members of Congress and the political establishment looking very nervous and growing very quiet before they get clobbered by mounds of incontrovertible evidence publicly presented in a few months. If national security remains a major election issue in November of next year, quite a few political careers could be irreparably damaged - not least the nominee from the Democratic presidential candidates, all of whom have made some hay of the weapons issue.

Regardless of what the president has planned, politicans are unwise politically, logically, and morally to indirectly defend Saddam Hussein while attempting to damage Bush in lieu of conspicuous piles of weapons and facilities. Especially those who stated beliefs to the contrary under the same circumstances in 1998.