- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Although the inspectors were in Iraq, Saddam did now allow them to visit all the places they wanted. They were often delayed, apparently with the intention of removing evidence before they got there. Recent testimony says that Saddam himself believed that he actually possessed the weapons, and his advisers were too scared to tell him otherwise.
That, I believe, is why the Times ignored the quote. It's false on its surface; like Saddam, Mr. Bush's advisers tell him what he wants to hear. But there is some truth to it a bit deeper: the inspectors weren't able to state conclusively that the weapons were gone, and Saddam was acting suspiciously. Terrible justification for a war, and Bush has made the case badly before and since, but I understand why the NYT would have bigger fish to fry in that press conference.
