# Thu Jun 5th - Bush to "reveal the truth" - how long should it take him to do so? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 8, 2003, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thu-jun-5th-bush-to-reveal-the-truth-how-long-should-it-take-him-to-do-so/180482 "2003-06-08T17:31:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![rexnervous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e9c0ed/32.png) [@rexnervous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rexnervous)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2003, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thu-jun-5th-bush-to-reveal-the-truth-how-long-should-it-take-him-to-do-so/180482/1 "2003-06-08T17:31:44Z")
Yes, another thread on the WMDs, but focusing on one aspect. On Thursday June 5th, > [@](#): > > President George W. Bush vowed Thursday to “reveal the truth” about what he has described as former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction. [From CNN](http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/05/sprj.irq.wmd.controversy/index.html) Disregarding my overall thoughts about this whole issue, my immediate reaction to this was “Ok, so let’s hear it.” I expected that ‘revealed truth’ to be immediately disseminated. Now it’s 4 days later, and there’s been nothing (concrete) further. So I have a few questions, and was wondering what people’s takes were on these. And from both sides of the issue. I have my thoughts about the answers to below, but am eager to hear all answers. 1. Doesn’t Bush saying he WILL reveal the truth imply that he hasn’t already? Otherwise, wouldn’t he have said “we already have revealed the truth”? 2. Disregarding the implications of the above question, shouldn’t Bush’s statement be immediately acted upon by the administration? Given the fact that they have had months/years to gather this ‘truth’, wouldn’t we then assume that it should be ready to be revealed, immediately? Why wait even a day? 3. Further to #2, doesn’t every day of delay after Bush’s statement give more ammunition to the idea that the administration is still hunting to gather further information so they can ‘reveal the truth’? 4. And finally, what does this say about what the truth was 3 months ago? Shouldn’t that have been the full ‘truth’? And if it was, why is the administration acting so defensively (IMHO)? Let’s try and keep the insults to a minimum. Have at it, then 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2003, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thu-jun-5th-bush-to-reveal-the-truth-how-long-should-it-take-him-to-do-so/180482/2 "2003-06-08T19:46:59Z")
This quote from the article might be of interest to those who argue that the WMDs _must_ be there because many were unaccounted for: “This does not necessarily mean that such items could not exist. They might. There remain a long list of items unaccounted for,” Blix said. “But it is not justified to jump to the conclusion that something exists just because it was unaccounted for.” Apparently, the inspectors were forced to leave by the pending U.S. invasion _before_ they were able to determine the truth of the matter. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thu-jun-5th-bush-to-reveal-the-truth-how-long-should-it-take-him-to-do-so/180482/3 "2003-06-09T04:12:38Z")
> [@](#): > > Apparently, the inspectors were forced to leave by the pending U.S. invasion before they were able to determine the truth of the matter. The last big time they left (1998) was also because they were recalled to make way for a bombing run. Funny syncroncity. Bush has said, in Poland, that they found both weapons making materials, AND weapons. What is he talking about? I guess we’ll find out, hopefully soon: though someone should inform him that, if he’s reffering to the hope that they WILL find something later on, his statement about finding weapons would not thereby be proved correct. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2003, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thu-jun-5th-bush-to-reveal-the-truth-how-long-should-it-take-him-to-do-so/180482/4 "2003-06-09T06:54:27Z")
**rexnervous** , I think you’ve just mis-read what Bush said. [http://www.dod.gov/news/Jun2003/n06052003\_200306052.html](http://www.dod.gov/news/Jun2003/n06052003_200306052.html) > [@](#): > > Bush also addressed the fact that coalition forces have not found Iraqi weapons of mass destruction yet. “We’re on the look,” Bush said. “We’ll reveal the truth.” > > Bush pledged that Iraq will not serve as an arsenal for terrorists. “We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents,” he said. What he said was more along the lines of “We’ll expose the truth in Iraq”, i.e., as soon as he finds the WMDs, he going to tell you about it. Note, too, **Apos** , that he’s backed away from the earlier “found the weapons of mass destruction”, which was an obvious untruth.