Now we're getting somewhere

Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus Washington Post November 12, 2005 President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence. Neither assertion is wholly accurate. The administration's overarching point is true: Intelligence agencies overwhelmingly believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and very few members of Congress from either party were skeptical about this belief before the war began in 2003. Indeed, top lawmakers in both parties were emphatic and certain in their public statements. But Bush and his aides had access to much more voluminous intelligence information than did lawmakers, who were dependent on the administration to provide the material. And the commissions cited by officials, though concluding that the administration did not pressure intelligence analysts to change their conclusions, were not authorized to determine whether the administration exaggerated or distorted those conclusions. [via AmericaBlog] Finally the MSM is picking apart the story a little more; however, notice which paper this appeared in (NOT the NY Times, who led with Bush's propaganda today and yesterday; not the LA Times, seen by some as the 2nd most influential paper in the nation, who copied their rival for 1st place; and not the capital's other paper, who dittoed the "top" news outlets.) Bravo, I say, to the Washington Post, bravo!