I know this is not strictly on topic, but for the US guys out there, here is a link to Blix's full report, because CNN (and many other US news services) censored it.

Full text

Heres the CNN censored version.
Censored text

And heres the missing bits if you just want to read them...


""I trust that the Iraqi side will put together a similar list of names of persons who participated in the unilateral destruction of other proscribed items, notably in the biological field.

The Iraqi side also informed us that the commission, which had been appointed in the wake of our finding 12 empty chemical weapons warheads, had had its mandate expanded to look for any still existing proscribed items.

This was welcomed.

A second commission, we learnt, has now been appointed with the task of searching all over Iraq for more documents relevant to the elimination of proscribed items and programmes.

It is headed by the former minister of oil, General Amer Rashid, and is to have very extensive powers of search in industry, administration and even private houses.

The two commissions could be useful tools to come up with proscribed items to be destroyed and with new documentary evidence.

They evidently need to work fast and effectively to convince us, and the world, that this is a serious effort.

The matter of private interviews was discussed at length during our meeting.

The Iraqi side confirmed the commitment, which it made to us on 20 January, to encourage persons asked to accept such interviews, whether in or out of Iraq.

So far, we have only had interviews in Baghdad. A number of persons have declined to be interviewed, unless they were allowed to have an official present or were allowed to tape the interview.

Three persons that had previously refused interviews on Unmovic's terms, subsequently accepted such interviews just prior to our talks in Baghdad on 8 and 9 February.

These interviews proved informative. No further interviews have since been accepted on our terms.

I hope this will change. We feel that interviews conducted without any third party present and without tape recording would provide the greatest credibility.

At the recent meeting in Baghdad, as on several earlier occasions, my colleague Dr ElBaradei and I have urged the Iraqi side to enact legislation implementing the UN prohibitions regarding weapons of mass destruction.

In a letter just received two days ago, we were informed that this process was progressing well and this morning we had a message that legislation has now been adopted by the Iraqi National Assembly in an extraordinary session.

This is a positive step.

Mr President, I should like to make some comments on the role of intelligence in connection with inspections in Iraq. A credible inspection regime requires that Iraq provide full co-operation on "process" - granting immediate access everywhere to inspectors - and on substance, providing full declarations supported by relevant information and material.

However, with the closed society in Iraq of today and the history of inspections there, other sources of information, such as defectors and government intelligence agencies are required to aid the inspection process.

I remember how, in 1991, several inspections in Iraq, which were based on information received from a government, helped to disclose important parts of the nuclear
weapons programme.

It was realised that an international organisation authorised to perform inspections anywhere on the ground could make good use of information obtained from
governments with eyes in the sky, ears in the ether, access to defectors, and both eyes and ears on the market for weapons-related material.

It was understood that the information residing in the intelligence services of governments could come to very active use in the international effort to prevent
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

This remains true and we have by now a good deal of experience in the matter.

International organisations need to analyse such information critically and especially benefit when it comes from more than one source.

The intelligence agencies, for their part, must protect their sources and methods.

Those who provide such information must know that it will be kept in strict confidence and be known to very few people.

Unmovic has achieved good working relations with intelligence agencies and the amount of information provided has been gradually increasing.

However, we must recognise that there are limitations and that misinterpretations can occur.

Intelligence information has been useful for Unmovic.

In one case, it led us to a private home where documents mainly relating to laser enrichment of uranium were found.

In other cases, intelligence has led to sites where no proscribed items were found.

Even in such cases, however, inspection of these sites were useful in proving the absence of such items and in some cases the presence of other items - conventional munitions.

It showed that conventional arms are being moved around the country and that movements are not necessarily related to weapons of mass destruction.

The presentation of intelligence information by the US secretary of state suggested that Iraq had prepared for inspections by cleaning up sites and removing evidence of proscribed weapons programmes.

I would like to comment only on one case, which we are familiar with, namely, the trucks identified by analysts as being for chemical decontamination at a munitions depot.

This was a declared site, and it was certainly one of the sites Iraq would have expected us to inspect.

We have noted that the two satellite images of the site were taken several weeks apart."

scooby doo,

That's interesting.

I heard the full text on either MSNBC, Fox, or CNN. I don't know which as I just flipped to wherever I found it first.

Uh, just in case you guys didn't notice, nobody cares about a bunch of pro-Iraqi agitators. If I had my way, they'd be gassed in the streets.

According to our local news over the past week, the rallies today (in our area they are not only peace-oriented, but there are also several in support of US Troops) are an annual event. We had the same rally by the same major groups this time last year and the year before etc. They were comparing police presence and preparation to last year's. At least here, it's not something that someone just drummed up because of current events. It's just getting more attention and more support because of current events.

> I just turned into CNN at 4pm ET to check out what
> you are claiming. The first 15 minutes of the broadcast
> were dedicated to the demonstrations. Phrases such
> as "mass demonstrations" and "millions of protestors"
> were used. In addition, pictures from protests all over
> the world were shown.

Well fair enough... honestly, Ive been watching CNN intermittently through out the day and it seems that they increased the amount of coverage they gave as the day progressed but there was clearly a marked difference in the amount of coverage given to these protests by CNN versus the majority of news agencies which covered it almost exclusively.

This was the largest world protest ever that was attended by musicians, actors, politicians and world leaders. I mean this was, pretty much the story of the day if not the week and a world event yet CNN didn't move from regularly scheduled programming which on a sunday, would have been fairly easy to do. They also (from what I saw) failed to show any of those "from the air" shots really giving people an indication of the scale of these protests.

Why are you sooooo worried about the size and scale of the marches ???

Did you go out protesting ???

For the record this was completely sarcasm. See my follow up posts to see my stance on Bush. Or I can just say it again. Idiot.

Proof??

:Kissmy

Didn't you hear Rush? They just hate us because our our "freedom".

Everyone here is entitled to their OWN opinion

but no matter your opinion if you think war is right or wrong!
at the end of the day you aint got a shits chance of stopping this war happening!

Only one person can stop this war and its Saddam Hussein!

Its gonna happen people. wether we like it or not!

Its a sad thing but its harsh reality!

Where does this concept come from?

The flow of oil from Iraq isn't gonna change; It's still going to be sold on the open market just like it is today. If the US over takes Iraq next week the only thing that is going to change is the cost of our gas will go up.

The people of Iraq own that oil, no matter what the US does.

If the US controlled Iraq, they would now have a foot in the "OPEC".

I'm not saying this is the reason for the war, I'm just saying this *would* change some things...

So what you're saying is that if you want cheap oil you have the right to mass bombing and destruct a whole country. With that sick argument, then it would be right if somebody put a nuclear bomb in the middle or Central Park just to lower the price of the Big Mac. Now, what about buying oil to other countries not "in control by a madman" like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Venezuela, Mexico, Norway and other oil producers instead of human holocaust? You call that capitalism, right?

Quote:

"nobody supports us in this war" All except the several european countries that do, as well as isreael, turkey, etc.

There's a big difference between the pressures of USA against governments and what people from the "supporting countries" want. I know for sure that most american governments had some discreet support for USA, but I also know for sure that there were terrible pressures from USA and their slaves from IMF to get this support. Including the definitive cutting of credit for social assistance. That's happening right now in Argentina, and USA menaced to do the same to Venezuela, Chile, Uruguay and Bolivia. Most asian countries are against war. More european countries (including UK PEOPLE not the "cheeky bastard") are against war. Dunno bout Africa but I'm sure it's the same case than South and Central America. So, other than Turkey (possible retaliation victim) Israel (same, plus the representative of USA interestests in Middle East) and a few other countries, believe me that about 90% of people in the world is against war

Quote:

"nobody in the usa wants this war" The only people that dont are the large amount of democrat windbags that hate bush so much they would never support him no matter what. Its political, and if was clinton dropping the bombs they would have no problem. The people of the heartland support it.

Cannot make any apreciation on this cause I don't know

Quote:

"thousands of civillians will be killed" The millitary is pretty careful these days. Its not like we still have ww1 technology or something. These people are starving, and have no freedom whatsoever. To leave them under that rule is inhumane.

Well, this part shows your real colors. You were born in the wrong time and wrong place, you'd have been Hitler's right hand. Or even more. Anyway, as UN (an organism depending of USA wishes) reported, 500,000 CHILDREN died for direct or undirect reasons due to USA attacks. Not even civilians: CHILDREN (of course you won't care since you're way too enlighted to decide who must die "because letting them live is inhumane". Another thing: USA used in Irak previous bombing tactical nuclear weapons which prevent the ground and ambient to be useable for years due to radiation. USA announced last week their intention to use these weapons again. How is it "pretty careful" you oh so clear minded God? And how much of that starving comes from direct action of war?

Quote:

"it will create turmoil in the middle east" So it wont be like the nice happy place it is now? lol.

After all, is someone else lifes, childs, future, freedom, etc

Quote:

"it will cause more terroist attacks here" So we should form our policies to what terrroists that kill innocent women and children want? That is real smart. Even the french arent that cowardly.

Same as above but in your own country. Words can't describe you. But anyway, just in case, let's kill em all, those babies are trained to carry a lethal lollipop

Quote:

You will have to come up with better arguments than these.

Arguments for a braindead? Are you kidding me? :feels-hot

and for the record: I'm convinced Saddam Hussein is just another fascist, but what USA always does is to kill the people but and let the dictator alive and free. People from Irak is not responsible, people from USA isn't either. Common people just want a quiet, safe and happy life, the enjoying on other people's death and suffering makes you a psychopat, not a patriot.

Now, let's say USA starts a war, how many people will die? The perspectives are in the order of hundreds of thousands. Will they finish Saddam? Hell no! USA destroyed Afghanistan, did they catch, kill or stop Bin Laden? Of course not! Now getting a little bit of paranoid... did USA support Irak and sold war technology INCLUDING chemmical weapons? wasn't Bush a commercial partner of Bin Laden?

Get the facts straight you cocksucker redneck, you're very brave sitting behind your computer as other people (including American soldiers) will die

> They just hate us because our our "freedom".

September 11? Many reasons.... as you say, they hate our freedom, they hate our dominance, they hate our foreign policy (particularly US foreign policy), they hate western culture & lifestyle, and they hate the internet because they feel thats its a means by which to proliferate western values and democracy all over the world. They still use it though, hence the fucking millions of uniques from them that never convert.

Still.... in my view, the *main* bottom line is religion. Thats at the heart of it.