Negative Positive
Title: Why no "weapons of mass destruction" in the conspiracy?
Review: Let's say the Bush administration, or a cabal of Neo-cons, pulled off this incredible deception. Why didn't they then plant at least the elements used for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? The former is so hard, the latter comparatively simple. Bush would be vindicated and marching through Tehran by now. And it's not like he didn't have a huge window of time to "discover" some fissionable material. This whole conspiracy idea makes no sense without that crucial next step.
Is the review positive or negative? 