Who Is Lying About Iraq?

According to Norman Podhoretz, among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debate over Iraq, the one in particular that stands out above all others is the charge that George W. Bush misled us into an immoral and/or unnecessary war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been definitively exposed. He does a good job of debunking that falsehood in this article.

Also, this is very interesting. Last night, Chris Mathews was interviewing Carl Levin (D-Michigan), who is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. The interview was ostensibly about Levin's view that the intelligence was misused by the Bush Administration to justify the decision to go to war with Iraq. During the course of his explanation, he said something I found surprising:

I think basically they [the Bush Administration] decided immediately after 9/11 to go after Saddam. They began to—look there was plenty of evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons, by the way. That is not in dispute. There is plenty of evidence of that.

Say what? The notion that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons "is not in dispute"? I had never heard that from anyone before, much less someone who is an opponent of the war. So what is it? Did he have WMD or not?

Some prominent liberal politicians weigh-in here.