' "And members of McPhee's team and U.S. defense officials say that banned arms may never be found in Iraq."

"As for finding actual weapons, the operations officer said it may turn out that no weapons of mass destruction will be found."

Let the "spin" begin.'

Oh, I think their is already enough spin in the article.
Just because "some members and some defense officals" say something doesn't mean much. You could probably find some members and defense officals who believe just about anything- some might be hoping to find alien artifacts or Noah's Ark. Does this matter?

And look at this cute phrase:
"The recent U.N. inspectors never declared they had uncovered a program designed to produce weapons of mass destruction."

Did you notice the word, "recent" and also the use of the word "never"?
"Never" as has polymorphed into a few months. {Never did & never you mind, Billyboy, I'm journalist, cause I went skool.}

And basically there is no real news in this article- a rehash of what we are already aware of.

Meanwhile UN still hasn't lifted sanctions- which were put in place because Saddam's regime had refused to cooperate, resulting in the UN inspectors being unable to vertify whether or not there was WMD in Iraq [was there ever any other reason given for sanctions?]. With Saddam gone, one wonders why the UN still needs these sanctions- what is the UN justification for maintaining sanctions- was the purpose to punish the people of Iraq for "voting" such a poor leader? Why is the UN behaving in such a cruel fashion, what happen to all those poor children that France and Russia were *SO* concerned about? Perhaps the UN members are in denial over the regime change (it was in all the newspapers and on TV, but maybe this news didn't reach those living in that isolated section of New York City {or perhaps their sole source of news was obtained from Baghdag Bob}) or perhaps they reliving their perverted fantasy about having sanctions against the Evil One, aka the US of A, aka Daddy and Mommy?