>>>I noticed you didn't provide anything to refute the report from the Bush administration's guy in Iraq on the WMDs. Perhaps you missed it.
>>>
>>what wmd report>?
>
>The one completed by Charles Duelfer and presented to Congress:
>
>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134625,00.html
>

Yeah, I read it and noted that they had only searched a fraction of a fraction of the weapons repositories.
from page 40 of volume 3:

"Investigating Captured Enemy Ammunition Points
(CEA Consolidation Points)
ISG capitalized on efforts by Coalition Forces in
December 2003 to begin a program to consolidate
captured Iraqi weapons into seven pre-identifi ed
Captured Enemy Ammunition (CEA) Depots (see
Figure 7). As of mid-September 2004, Coalition
Forces have reviewed and cleared a total of 10,033
weapons caches dispersed throughout the country,
destroying a total of 243,045 tons of munitions. This
represents only part of Iraq’s pre-OIF munitions
inventory, and only a fraction of these were checked
by ISG technical experts for signs of chemical agent
fi ll. (See Annex H.) "



>The chief U.S. arms inspector in Iraq has found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction production by Saddam Hussein's regime after 1991.
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13150-2004Oct6.html
>
>The release of yesterday's definitive account on Iraq's weapons -- and its conclusion that Iraq no longer had weapons of mass destruction years before the U.S.-led invasion -- is only the latest in a series of damaging blows to the White House's strategy of portraying the war in Iraq as being on the cusp of success.

That's not what's being reported by the Washington Times -
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041028-122637-6257r.htm

"Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned. "