] Iraq has failed to explain or account for:
]
] -- large quantities of anthrax, botulinum toxin, and the
] carcinogen aflatoxin;
]
] -- ballistic missiles that exceed a U.N.-mandated range
] of 150 kilometers;
]
] -- efforts to procure uranium from abroad for its nuclear
] weapons program;
]
] -- 1.5 tons of the powerful nerve agent VX;
]
] -- 550 mustard gas-filled artillery shells and 400
] biological weapons-capable aerial bombs, and hundreds,
] possibly thousands, of tons of chemical precursors;
]
] -- 30,000 empty munitions that could be filled with
] chemical agents;

I've been hungry for more data on just what we think that Iraq has. I wanted to know -- do we have information on current weapons that they possess, or are we just looking for data on the stuff that we knew that they *did* possess? This report answers some of those questions.

Now as for the claim that we should wait for weapons inspectors to *find* it again in order to have proof -- I disagree. Yes, it would be nice if we *could* track some of it down ourselves, but I find myself looking around my own city and thinking, "If someone wanted to hide a truckload of missile warheads even as close as within a 100-mile radius of my own home, I don't know if *I* could find it, in an area that I'm familiar with." So, having a team of a few hundred inspectors combing an area the size of France, looking for something that other people may be trying very hard to keep hidden? It does feel more like a needle in a haystack problem.

This report raises some good points. If we have data on large amounts of prohibited material that Iraq had in the past, then I think the burden should now be on Iraq to explain what happened to that material, rather than the burden being on *us* to prove that they still have it.

White House Report Details Iraq's Efforts to Block U.N. Inspections