>Try
>
>http://www.namibian.com.na/2003/june/world/03D75B259B.html

The U.N was given 12 years. I think the U.S. should get a little longer than 2 months.

>or how about
>
>http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2917852

Is Hans Blix now saying that no weapons will be found? Oh, I guess he isn't, according to your own source:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/11/1055220633852.html

We know for sure that they did exist ... and we cannot exclude they (the coalition) may find something."

>or even
>
>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/11/1055220633852.html

Read the article carefully. Notice that Blix never says anything about about the U.S. administration or the Pentagon. Yet, the headline of the article is Blix blasts Pentagon 'bastards'. Not once did Blix say that. As a matter of fact, in the article you cited above:

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2917852

He denied saying members of the U.S. administration had smeared him, saying former arms inspectors and an unnamed former Swedish prime minister had spread stories critical of his work as head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) after the Gulf war in 1991.

The article is deliberately misleading the reader into thinking Blix was talking about the U.S. administration or Pentagon, when in fact he wasn't. What a joke. The writer wins my Jayson Blair award for the week.

>What about these?
>
>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/12/1055220705912.html
>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/07/1054700443033.html
>http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/08/1055010874259.html
>
>You mean this hasn't appeared on Fox yet? How odd.

When you find an article on Fox as deliberately misleading as the one above, you let me know. In the meantime, here is some more non-Fox reading:

http://www.nationalreview.com/30jun03/editors063003a.asp

The regime itself admitted that it had produced anthrax and VX. In his January 27 report to the Security Council, Hans Blix said that there was "strong evidence" that Iraq had produced more anthrax than it had said, and suggested that it had higher-quality VX, too.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26671-2003Jun6.html?nav=hptoc_eo

Go back and take a look at the report Hans Blix delivered to the U.N. Security Council on Jan. 27. On the question of Iraq's stocks of anthrax, Blix reported "no convincing evidence" that they were ever destroyed. But there was "strong evidence" that Iraq produced more anthrax than it had admitted "and that at least some of this was retained." Blix also reported that Iraq possessed 650 kilograms of "bacterial growth media," enough "to produce . . . 5,000 litres of concentrated anthrax." Cirincione concluded that "it is likely that Iraq retains stockpiles of anthrax, botulinum toxin and aflatoxin."