Ironically, John Derbyshire’s argument that Britney Spear’s 55-hour “marriage” does not prove that gays who would show respect to the institution should be married applies just as well to those who say that priests who violate their vows show we should get rid of celibacy.
The short answer is that if a customary social institution is trashed and trivialized by irresponsible buffoons, we ought to exert more control over it se is not a nuclear explosion, but to spread highly radioactive material over a large area.
Now let’s engage in a brief thought experiment. Terrorists can’t just use any old radioactive material for such bombs. A weapon needs some heavy-duty radioactives to be effective. Such stuff isn’t available at the corner store, only a few countries in the world have it.
Considering what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq, what country would be willing to pass the material on to terrorists? Even Quaddafi has returned to the league of civilized nations by giving up its weapons of mass destruction program after learning the lesson of Iraq.
So, what country—with access to WMD—had nothing to lose by giving that material to terrorists? the obvious answer is Iraq. And thus I can come to the reasonable conclusion that Saddam must have had access to those materials.
Okay, all of this isn’t evidence, but I don’t believe the hunt for dirty bombs was a put-on, and so it isn’t unreasonable to speculate as to their origin. I still believe that Saddam’s WMD are out there, whether buried in an Iraqi desert or long ago transferred to Syria, Lebanon, or even Iran.
The risks entailed in such a scheme—that we would track the bomb back to its source—would be greater than any benefit to such a so-called ally.
Well today CNN had a story showing that Sadam had what they think are blister agents buried in southern Iraq in missles. So it’s not that great of a leap to figure out that one.