Tom Brosz wrote:

The most blatant attempt to rewrite history is the effort to convince everyone that before the war, only Bush and his cronies believed Saddam had WMD, or worse, didn't believe it either and lied about it.

No Tom, the point here is not who believed the lie, but rather who was doing the lying, and for what purpose.

It has already been clearly demonstrated that Joseph Wilson, among others, had determined that the Niger yellowcake story was without merit. His findings had been communicated to the highest levels of the government long before Pres. Bush's ill-starred 2003 SOTU address. Similarly, experts dismissed claims that Iraq's acquisition of aluminum tubes was meant for uranium enrichment, but that did not stop Bush adminstration officials from endlessly repeating the claim.

No evidence mattered more to the nuclear debate than Iraq's attempt to buy aluminum tubes overseas. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, among many others, scorned the Baghdad government's explanation that it sought the tubes as artillery rocket casings. By August, news accounts made clear that the U.S. government's top nuclear centrifuge experts dissented strongly from the claim that the tubes were meant for uranium enrichment.

(my emphasis)
Search in Iraq Fails to Find Nuclear Threat

Let that sink in:

In August 2002, our top centrifuge expert said there was no merit to the Bush administration claim that Iraq was acquiring aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment. Earlier, in March 2002, another expert dismissed the Niger yellowcake story.

When your top experts tell you one thing, and you turn around and say the opposite, most people would call that lying.

S