"...one then has to accept the logical premise under these circumstances that much of the rest of the world was also either lying or stupid."

Which might tempt me to use the cliched parental argument: “Well, if everybody else was jumping off a cliff, would you do it too?”

I’ll resist the temptation to use that argument because your premise ignores the fact that before the invasion, there were a lot of folks (myself included) that stated that what “proof” we had seen was neither proof nor even very convincing. In short, don’t pull me (or a lot of folks the world over) down with you guys. We were properly skeptical. You guys shared Bush’s hard-on.

On a bad day, we were told that we were stupid, or willfully ignorant of what was before our eyes. Let me know when we can expect the apologies for those bad days.

On a good day we were told that of course the real evidence (the “good stuff”) was classified. And that we must trust the CinC, who had all the info at hand. Now that the “good stuff” has boiled down to Masters theses published on the internet, forged faxes, a tin-pot dictator’s incomplete book-keeping, accounts from sources that wanted the US to invade, and warmed-over Clinton and Bush I intel, shouldn’t we feel betrayed?