Exhaustive review sponsored by the Pentagon finds NO link between Saddam, al Qaida

champ76 said
It's perfectly fine to go back and second guess, especially in light of additional intelligence. But why must we ascribe evil, devious motives to everything the administration did? And why must people who happen to agree with the decision at the time be labeled as blind ignorant followers?

There must be some rational explanation for the continuing to defend this administration. I think it has everything to do with blind partisanship more than anything else.

As to your first claim, there's strong, STRONG evidence that it wasn't simply just a failure of intelligence. One. More. Time. It was a manipulation of intelligence to concoct a case to go to war based on a completely false premise.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/22/washington/22intel.html
http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2004/12/cia_retaliation.html

Intelligence which contradicted the administration's case was IGNORED. Evil? No. Devious? Absolutely. Dishonest? Absolutely. Disgusting? I think so.

Put simply, if you believe that this administration was victimized by simply bad intelligence, your just simply ignoring facts. Officials in the admininstration started talking about taking out Hussein long before 9-11, which common sense tells me there was a degree at least ignoring some of the intelligence which contradicted the "slam dunk" case made to the American people to invade in the first place. :nono: Sorry, you can continue believe that it was as simple as an intellegence failure. It wasn't.

To me, it's painfully obvious who continues to believe the administration DIDN'T pull the wool over anybody's eyes, and that they acted as honestly as possible here--it's painfully clear that only those most strident partisans continue to defend the administration's behavior. Sorry, but if the shoe fits.........which is why blind partisanship from any source is the scourge of modern politics.