War and Peace
Opinions from all over the spectrum on those well-hidden WMDs:

Molly Ivins has the best line: “The ex post facto development of tender concern on the part of hawks for human rights is delightful to see”. As always, the humour is matched by the clarity and brevity of her writing.

Glenn Reynolds, on the other hand, delivers a rambling, illogical, humorless screed. He does, however, make a good point (finally!) at the end: “In a way, of course, the "Bush lied" stuff serves the Administration's interests, by muddying the waters so that less dramatic, but more pointed, questions are hard to ask”.

Howard Owens does a good job of summarizing the arguments across the board.

The Agonist points to a summary of opinions from the world press. It also points to a claim by a Norwegian weapons inspector that the US provided the UN Security Council with misleading information about Iraq's possession of WMDs.

Finally, the controversy over the WMDs and how it's affecting the British political scene is captured here by the Observer.

My opinion? The "Bush lied" and other conspiracy theories are worthless distractions. So is the right's revisionist argument that we did it to free Iraq from Saddam. I never believed that we went to war because of the threat of WMDs, much less to liberate the Iraqi people or to get Iraq's oil or to go after terrorism. The real reason was always power politics - the desire to reshape the political landscape in the Middle East in a way favorable to US interests and control. The threat of Saddam possessing WMDs was a critical tool in the Administration's P.R. campaign to gain the necessary support for the war. And so their existence and relevance were hyped as an effective way to influence public and political opinion.

And now the outcome (at least so far) doesn't justify the hype. This is causing real fallout in Britain. The PR machine is in full spin cycle here to try to contain the damage to the Administration's credibility. Ideological lines have been drawn - and Reynolds is right: “less dramatic, but more pointed, questions are hard to ask”.