I apologize, but I have actually read the full text of Bush's speech at Whitehall Palace in London. I do not have my computer technology on me here, but I would like it if one of the readers would calculate the times the words "liberty," "freedom," "democracy," "liberation" were used by the esteemed dear Leader. And remember that Goebbels--and that sinister Nazi propagandist should know-- defined propaganda as "repitition, constant repetition." The New York Times on Thursday was quite pleased that he quoted philosophers: (Locke and Adam Smith, in question, and one can debate whether they qualify as philosophers, in the same way as George W. Bush and Hegel qualify. He brushed over the issue of WMD, and said that Saddam ignored demands to "end the nightmare for his people." In fact, the US did not (whether under Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, or W. Bush) make a big deal about Saddam's brutal dictatorship. It was all about WMDs. We remember that Bush Sr.'s government permitted Saddam to use his helicopter gunships to slaughter more than 50000 Iraqis, while the US was busy celebrating its military victory at the time: NYC parade and all. In its analysis of the speech, the New York Times (p. A 13, Thursday edition, Nov. 20--remember it for the historical record): noticed the issue of WMDs. So it stated: "No substantial cahes of chemical or biological weapons have been found." LOOK AT THE LANGUAGE; WHEN THEY SAY "NO SUBSTANTIAL" THEY ARE IMPLYING THAT SOME NON-SUBSTANTIAL CACHES WERE FOUND. And it still passes as the best newspaper in the US.