When it is "degraded" beyond the point of serviceability. When it "couldn't be used" for its purpose. When it is "unfilled." When it is "assessed to exist" and not known to exist. In short, a weapon of mass destruction is not a weapon of mass destruction when it cannot cause mass destruction.

What is milk after its expiration date? The problem is that what we found still doesn't amount to much, and it certainly wasn't any immanent threat, to us or anyone else.

When it "couldn't be used" for its purpose.

And that is straight from an unnamed pentagon source.

So since the release of the Iraqi Perspectives Project we've gone from "Saddam didn't harbor terrorists and didn't have WMDs" to "Saddam did, in fact, harbor international terrorists, and he SORT OF had WMD."

This nonsense about WMD is just a desperation move by Santorum. He's down by nearly 20 points in the polls. I don't know what Hoekstra's excuse is?