It's easier to deny existence of WMDs

To the editor:I cannot believe Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction before we invaded in 2003. It makes much more sense that President Bush found it easier to deny their existence than to admit what happened to them. And it is harming our direction and focus as a nation to not admit what really happened.

During the great U.S. military motorcade to capture Baghdad, I remember reports of traces of poisonous material found in the river just north of Baghdad. A military unit, with a Fox News reporter embedded, took the canvas off a trailer and found missiles. Several miles south of Baghdad, troops found a double-barbed wire perimeter that appeared to be a previous bunker for WMDs.

I've heard from credible personal contacts that our military operated commando-style operations in several Mideastern countries, destroying chemical weapons being produced in remote labs.

I spent several years in the news business, enough to know that truth doesn't always come out immediately, although it ultimately tends to. I also believe that truth resonates. And mistruths, even told for good reason, cause confusion.

Recently, Rush Limbaugh mentioned that it was easier for the Bush administration to not admit the existence of WMDs because it might harm our relations with Russia. David Limbaugh has said basically the same thing to me personally. They don't seem to realize how much this white lie is blunting our national will on fighting terrorism. Please demand that the truth be told.

FRED KELLER, Cape Girardeau