So what's wrong with this story by the New York Times?

In the weeks after Baghdad fell in April 2003, looters systematically dismantled and removed tons of machinery from Saddam Hussein's most important weapons installations, including some with high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear arms, a senior Iraqi official said this week in the government's first extensive comments on the looting. [...]

Dr. Araji said equipment capable of making parts for missiles as well as chemical, biological and nuclear arms was missing from 8 or 10 sites that were the heart of Iraq's dormant program on unconventional weapons.

Well for starters, the New York Times and the anti-war left have spent the last several years repeatedly claiming that Bush LIED!!! Time and time again they've claimed that there was no WMD, and that Bush lied so that he could take revenge on Saddam Hussein for trying to kill his father. So the New York Times own story would seem to contradict their years old anti-war, anti-Bush position.

Then there is this story from the UK Telegraph:

Saddam Hussein's regime offered a $2 million (�1.4 million) bribe to the United Nations' chief weapons inspector to doctor his reports on the search for weapons of mass destruction.

Rolf Ekeus, the Swede who led the UN's efforts to track down the weapons from 1991 to 1997, said that the offer came from Tariq Aziz, Saddam's foreign minister and deputy.

This prompts conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh to point out that the emperor has no clothes.

Why? If there weren't any, why? Why start bribing people about this? Two million just to the chief inspector? What was it he doing to some of the underlings? Why bribe anybody if there were no weapons of mass destruction?

Something tells me the media won't stop the presses to issue a retraction.

(Cross posted at the Command Post.)