Is anyone truly surprised by the following facts? 1. Iraqi military forces have not used a single weapon of mass destruction against US and British military forces despite ample opportunity and, if you believe the Bush administration, copious supplies. 2. US and British military forces, despite exerting tremendous amounts of energy and importing specialized units to do the job, have not found a single weapon of mass destruction. 3. US politicians and generals point to the presence of protective suits and anti-nerve agents in Iraqi hospitals as evidence of the existence of Iraqi chemical weapons. The last point is such a logical fallacy that it seems meant to provoke public laughter rather than indignation. Imagine a health-care facility possessing supplies both to heal those afflicted by chemical weapons but also to protect medical personnel. If a hospital keeps rattlesnake antivenin on hand does that mean that the local military force employs rattlesnake venom as a biological agent? If a doctor's office keeps a supply of hepatitis vaccine on hand could invaders expect to suffer under an onslaught of biological warfare? If an invading army stumbled upon a kitchen that contained both ammonia and bleach, should everyone break out their chemical weapons suits on the off chance that someone might be planning on mixing the two chemicals and producing chlorine gas? Realistically, that is the argument being made the the US government.