Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Because I am pretty certain that Billy Claude didn't vote Gore in 2000 (I am certain of this without him saying so),

Coming clean on dirty weapons
Published: June 5 2003 5:00 | Last Updated: June 5 2003 5:00

It should be standard practice, after every war, to have an inquest to see how prewar intelligence matches up to postwar reality. But after the Iraq conflict, it is essential. The inquiries now in train on both sides of the Atlantic must answer the very damaging accusations that intelligence was politically manipulated to exaggerate the threat posed by Baghdad's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and therefore to justify the war. The result of the inquiries by parliament and the US Congress will determine in large part the credibility of their governments.

The WMD issue should not be minimised by the legal nicety that Iraq's defiance of successive United Nations resolutions was sufficient justification for the war. Nor can it be subsumed in the various political rationales for removing Saddam Hussein as a tyrant and serial abuser of human rights. For it was the claim that Iraq's WMD were a clear and present danger that was used to tip the US to an extent, and Britain decisively, into war. And so far no such weaponry has been found.

In the UK, Tony Blair yesterday flatly denied the charge of political tampering with the assessment of his joint intelligence committee (JIC) by, for instance, claiming that some of Iraq's WMD weapons could be fired within 45 minutes of a launch order. This claim, the prime minister insisted, came from the intelligence services.

The latter have been unwisely undermined by the assertion by John Reid, leader of the Commons, that "rogue elements" in the spy service are out to get the government. But it should be easy enough for the inquiry by parliament's intelligence and security committee to check the veracity of Mr Blair's claim of non-interference. It is true this cross-party body takes evidence in private and reports to the government. But arrangements governing an independent inquiry, such as the Franks commission after the Falklands war, would not differ greatly. Mr Blair has promised to publish the intelligence committee's report, which will be possible to cross-check with the findings of the foreign affairs committee's parallel inquiry.

The Bush administration is not under such direct fire for rigging intelligence to suit its belligerent case. But Congress's powerful armed services and intelligence committees have launched inquiries. These will focus mainly on whether and how the enormous US intelligence machine got it wrong on Iraq's WMD. But Congress should go on to ask why. For the signs are that much intelligence came from Iraqi exiles and defectors.

The contamination of intelligence on Iraq from patently self-serving sources may not worry Americans, who may feel any means justified the end of Mr Hussein. But it should concern them, as well as countries such as Britain that draw heavily from US sources of intelligence. The troubling questions raised by Iraq need settling if US calls to action over WMD in countries such as Iran are to command support.

Pentagon Study of Mini-Nuclear Weapons Nears Approval
Congress moves closer to giving the Pentagon permission to study -- though not to develop -- small nuclear weapons potent enough to destroy underground facilities in a precise fashion. Supporters argue that such weapons might cause fewer unintended deaths and injuries above ground, but fallout remains a concern. NPR's Tom Gjelten reports.

http://discover.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.jhtml?prgId=2&prgDate=June/10/2003