>Sorry, when did I say I believed Sadaam? I said he 'professed to have destroyed'. My discussion is about what Blix did or did not say. He did not say any weapons were moved, as I thought you implied in your previous post.

No, what I *speculate* is that they were moved. Facts are -- according to Blix before the invasion -- there are some missing. I *speculate* the best choice would be to move them.

>Blix didn't say. For all I know, he might have thought the weapons were moved, or he might have thought they didn't exist any more, but that the paperwork was shoddy. I don't feel qualified to put words in his mouth. You seem not to be hampered by that issue.

Never did put words in this mouth. Again, I've done nothing but *speculate* they were moved.

>This does imply very clearly though, that you believe they were moved, and not that they didn't exist. All I want is evidence.

Yessss... you're finally getting it... I *speculate* they were moved. I, too, would like evidence. Then, the *speculation* on all sides could end.

>I doubt very much that there would have been 'negotiations' this time around. If Sadaam started playing games, then Bush could attack him at any time. Why not let Blix finish what he started? My guess is that Bush did not want a situation where Blix finally announced that there were no WMDs. A guess, yes, but I don't know what else explains the rush.

"this time around?" "If Saddam *started* playing games?" Please! How many times do we have to go "around" before we realize Saddam was "playing games" all along? Don't you think 11 years is enough time to show a genuine interest in complying with UN resolutions?