>>>Whose administration? Ours? I think it was Bush who specifically mentioned WMDs on the move to sympathetic countries as a possibility before we ever landed in Iraq. And Syria has always been an issue when it comes to terrorist states. That entire area has sponsored various forms of terrorism for decades, which -- by the way -- was *before* the current administration took office... at least until the truth ministers try to convince us otherwise (we were *always* at war with East Asia). So, again, let's stop pretending we know which person is responsible for which policy in which administration that's really to blame... let's end the political posturing... let's deal with facts and figure the mess out. Then, when the dust settles we can all sit back and gather our pointed throwing stones.
>>>
>>>>Maybe the administration knew there were no wmd's to move to Syria. So Syria is not an issue.
>>
>>1. No WMD's were found before by Blix and his crew, nor after the invasion by the U.S. forces.
>>2. When no WMD's were found the tune changed to 'liberation'.
>>
>>The rest is speculation. You choose to speculate based on what you would like to believe is going on, and I choose to speculate based on the only actual facts we have.
>
>The facts are still coming in
>http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0B16F9385E0C728EDDAD0894DB404482
>http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005133
>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1613625/posts
>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1616468/posts

These 'facts' may or may not be meaningful. If so, then it needs airing, but I have real problems with phrases like An Iraqi Scientist Is Said to Assert. Of the 4 items you posted, the only one that really seems to me to have any merit at all is the opinionjournal item. The first looks like more speculation, and the last 2 are blogs, and while there may be some truth, I have real problems taking blogs too seriously. Too often they are fitting facts to their own theories. As the journal points out, it may be an article of faith among war opponents that there is no link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, but it is really no less an article of faith among war proponents that there is. I want to see real information coming out of accepted news areas, not isolated articles by one side of the other propping up their own views. There is far too much lunatic fringe on both sides of this issue.

I don't know if Sadaam had WMD's or not. I only know that none were found (before or after), and no evidence seems to have arisen showing that they went to Syria prior to the invasion.