Phoenix32890 wrote:If the bacteria were innocuous, why were they ordered destroyed? 
Well, - just speculating - the article suggests this:
Quote:But their accounts indicate [..] that the former Iraqi regime was deeply concerned about any material that could raise the suspicion of U.N. experts. [..] "The order was to hide anything that might make the inspectors suspicious."
and
Quote:Rasheed said some basic materials were destroyed just to avoid any suspicions that they could be used for military purposes. "We took home media for culturing bacteria and shaker-incubators used for fermentation," he said. "Now we will bring them back."
I mean - remember when you were a teenager and you were almost caught at something you hadnt actually done that time, though you'd done it often enough before? Like, say, you used to secretly smoke pot often enough, just not now, not anymore - but still, who's gonna believe that when they find the ashtray and remaining half-empty pack of king size cigarette paper? Y're gonna quickly throw those away when your dad's knocking on your bedroom door, aren't ya.
<shrugs> But that's just one random take. It's like Frank says, "we've had other "good leads" that simply did not pan out" - so many announcements of suspicious finds they then had to back out of. Perhaps Saddam did have remaining forbidden stuff, perhaps he didn't. The claims of US intelligence that the UN inspectors were botching up, deliberately so even, and that the US knew all about what was
really going on - claims that were used to justify its right to start this war - certainly look disingenious now.
