Here is the main quote of interest: "C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC [American National Security Council] has no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

Well, there it is. No response yet from the White House, and no one really pressing the issue. Instead, the "investigation" has blamed the intelligence system, not the policy makers, even though over a year before, it was already known in these diplomatic circles that policy was driving the intelligence. Moreover, the lack of planning of the aftermath of the invasion was already evident.

Of course, we shouldn't be surprised. Such is the way the principalities and powers work. The Democratic administration of Bill Clinton was just as adept at lying. But it should clarify one point: this was/is an unjust war, voluntarily and intentionally set as a war of aggression on false pretenses.

Didn't Saddam Hussein kind of do the same thing in the invasion of Kuwait?