Ok, the report says they don't know of Saddam producing and wmd after the Gulf War('know' could get real interesting to argue), but that he was actively working to have programs set up to begin producing on short order. In one case, he was advised that if they were willing to sacrifice the equipment- I assume because of contamination- they could produce mustard gas in large quantity in a few days, through sarin would take longer. So if he didn't have actual stockpiles, he could start making the stuff in short order.
I didn't consider the wmd issue the big one for going into Iraq. Support for terrorists and humanitarian issues alone took care of any 'justification' to offer to world opinion. And I have a question; according to what I've seen, we've found a: binary sarin artillery shells, b: mustard shells, c: banned centrifuges for enriching uranium, and d: trailers set up to produce chemicals. And in the last, when they inspected them some of the troops and journalists showed signs of chemical exposure and required treatment. AND, last I heard, there's still square miles of ammo dumps that haven't been fully inspected. Based on what we've found and know- including the chemical weapons the Poles got from an arms dealer- the only reason I think this is still a loud issue is that a bunch of people will not accept anything other than a multi-ton pile of chemical artillery shells and rocket warheads as proof that Saddam was anything we 'really needed to be concerned about'. And then they'd try to say it was our fault he produced the stuff.