21 April 2003 >> Today’s New York Times contains a report shedding new light on Iraq’s weapons program. According to the article, an Iraqi scientist who worked on the weapons program for over a decade has been providing the following details:

“Iraq destroyed chemical weapons and biological warfare equipment only days before the war began.” Apparently, it was the threat of force—and not the threat of U.N. inspections—that finally convinced Saddam Hussein to dismantle his weapons program.

“[S]tarting in the mid-1990s, Iraq had secretly sent unconventional weapons and technology to Syria” and “more recently was cooperating with al Qaeda”. Still not convinced that Iraq was central to the war on terror?

Recently, Iraq shifted focus to “research and development projects that are virtually impervious to detection by international inspectors.” Perhaps Saddam Hussein sought to turn Iraq into a clearinghouse for weapons development information. This, coupled with the al Qaeda link, underscores the danger that Saddam Hussein’s regime posed.

If the scientist’s statements are true, it provides yet more vindication for those of us who supported action against Saddam Hussein.

11 April 2003 >> “It took three weeks for the media to declare the Afghan war to a quagmire, but it took them only a week to make the same proclamation about the Iraq war. Although the media can’t claim credit for accuracy, they at least deserve a pat on the back for increasing the speed at which they’re wrong by a whopping 200%.” More >>

4 April 2003 >> Anti-Israeli sentiment ran strong at the San Francisco protest, in some cases suggesting an undercurrent of anti-Semitism. Is support for a Jewish state the same as ethnic cleansing? Should the Israelis be shipped to Madagascar? Some of the protesters thought so... More >>

2 April 2003 >> A reader detects “subtle arrogance” on my part and that of Michael Moore. I object on the grounds that there’s nothing subtle about Michael Moore’s arrogance. More >>