updated 12:10 p.m. ET September 15, 2003

Britain, US postpone WMD report for lack of evidence

Liberal critics had hinted that US President George Bush would try to use it as his "September surprise"; a report by the Iraq Survey Group which would prove that Saddam Hussein really did have weapons of mass destruction. But now the Sunday Times of London, and other publications, say that the report has been delayed "indefinitely" because the group was unable to get any evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

David Kay, the leader of the Iraq Survey Group, had hinted in July that he had seen enough to convince him that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein did have a program to produce weapons of mass destruction. But last week British officials said they believed Kay had been "kite-flying" and that no hard evidence had been uncovered.

The Sunday Times report comes two days after NBC reported that the search for WMD in Iraq had "been a bust."

"He [David Kay] has not found the kinds of things the administration expected to find - large quantities of biological and chemical weapons or evidence that were destroyed prior to the war," David Albright, a former UN weapons' inspector, told NBC News.

"[The US and Britain] would have hoped and they would have been happy to see if we had said, 'Here Iraq has violated, here they have, here is the smoking gun. We have found it," Mr. Blix said. "And when we didn't do that, well, then they were disappointed and then they overinterpreted their own intelligence."

Bush administration officials continued to defend their WMD claims. During the weekend Vice President Dick Cheney said WMD would be found in Iraw. In a speech last Friday to soldiers returning from Iraq, President Bush repeated his charge that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

The interpretation of intelligence about WMD has once again become a hot topic in Britain. The Guardian reports that British PM Tony Blair was definitely warned by his intelligence services not to exaggerate claims about WMD in Iraq, or else he would misrepresent the situation. Also, a new government report said that the same intelligence services warned Blair that it was more likely terrorists would get their hands on WMD if the US and Britain invaded Iraq (because of the confusion resulting from an invasion), than if they did not.

The BBC reports that Mr. Blair's decision to ignore the findings of his intelligence service was defended by Health Minister John Reid, one of Blair's most loyal supporters. But no sooner had these reports surfaced when other damaging stories appeared about the Blair government. Excerpts from "Blair's War," a new book by political journalist John Kampfner, were published in the Mail on Sunday. The book alleges that days before the Iraq war began, Britain's foreign secretary Jack Straw asked Prime Minister Tony Blair not to send British troops to the conflict. Instead, Mr. Straw wanted Britain to offer the US "moral support." The British Foreign Office issued a statement Sunday that did not deny the story, but said Straw remains convinced that military action against Iraq was the right decision.

The Independent reports that Blair's decision to go to war is being questioned by Labour Party aides throughout Britain, many of whom believed Blair lied to them about the war. The Independent also said it is likely that Blair's Iraq policies will be condemned by his own party when it holds its annual convention next week.