WUI (Writing under the influence)

Well, it must be true. According to most in liberal media and my local fish wrap, the Oregonian, we didn't find any WMD in Iraq thus there were no WMD in Iraq hence Iraq posed no threat.

If I had a newspaper, the headline today would be "Osama is dead!" and my reasoning would be something like this: since we haven't yet found Osama, he doesn't exist, he is dead. Good job, president!

Incidentally, I didn't think that the final report said Iraq posed no threat. So I thought that the only sane conclusion was that the war was justified.

But what do you expect from fish wrap journalism? Only in the 8^th paragraph does the Oregonian say:

"There is no doubt that Saddam was a threat to our nation, and there is no doubt that he had WMD capability, and the Duelfer report is very clear on these points," said James Wilkinson, a White House deputy national security adviser, using the abbreviation for weapons of mass destruction.

Unfortunately, our public school educated populace stops reading shortly after the headline.

Speaking of fish wrap journalism, the same report states that our French "friends" got pretty rich supporting Saddam but this never made it into the Oregonian piece. So how do you pass the global test with professors like these?

BTW, only the 8^th paragraph in my article would quote somebody who thinks Osama is still alive.