How's this for a weapon of mass destruction?

How's this for a weapon of mass destruction?

The Associated Press reports that a roadside bomb discovered this month in Baghdad indeed contained sarin. It was apparently an adapted bomb, simply an artillery shell (it would need to be spun very fast ie fired for the two precursor chemicals to mix completely), so the amount of sarin released was very low. But it is thought that this weapon was part of a much larger stockpile. This particular shell may have predated the Gulf war, and may have been manufactured as far back as 1988.

With the discovery of mustard gas in another shell found earlier this month, it is obvious that there were large numbers of chemical weapons in Iraq - you don't just find that sort of thing in downtown Paris or Munich, and here we have two chemical weapons found in the last month in Baghdad.

I'd say that these two discoveries by themselves prove President Bush correct prior to the commencement of the war: that Iraq did possess the ability and was pursuing the creation of weapons of mass destruction.

The terrorist connections to Iraq are obvious as well - Nick Berg's kidnapping and beheading was a graphic example of that.

So to all those who have been spouting "Bush lied, people died" - just because something rhymes doesn't mean it's true. Not only did Bush (and his staff and the American intelligence-gathering community) not lie, they actually got it right. And instead of doing nothing , or pulling back at the first stubbed toe, Bush has remained steadfast.

John Kerry changes positions on issues more often than he changes his underwear. George W. Bush sticks to his guns. It's a pretty clear choice this November.