[congressman]

Tariq Aziz didn't know anything about WMDs he just did as he was told. He was a joke, and the point was, he didn't know the truth. If you showed him he still couldn't see it. Besides that, you are narrowing your timeline to the period that best suits your argument. Fact is Aziz served at the pleasure of Saddam, and long before 9/11 there were US weapons inspectors working for the UN in Iraq destroying WMDs. They had them. But by 9/11 they were all destroyed.

But that's another subject entirely.

Well, its still not a correct analogy. Regardless of what Tariq knew, he still told what WAS the truth. They had no weapons at the time of the invasion in 2003. He stated clearly that they didn't have them, regardless of his actual knowledge. Unlike Clinton who after 9/11, as well as Kerry, and others stated that Iraq had weapons. And when you mention weapons inspectors, you leave out the key parts of deception, and being kicked out by Iraq. But as you said, yes.. this is an entirely seperate topic, and i'll stay on point as long as you do. If you'd like to continue to agree that Tariq Aziz said there were no weapons after 9/11, then we can keep doing that as well. Maybe we can throw in some "Scott Ritter" and Al-Barardei, or even a hint of Downing Street memos, and if we're lucky.. We can finish it off with "CurveBall"...

Thank God though that Iraq only had a small amount of WMD when we invaded, I'm nearly positive they'd all be in the hands of terrorists at this moment.. which would only make my job that much more dangerous here in Baghdad.