I think it's obvious there was a screw up and people want to see whose screwup it was. That thread I posted called the Lie Factory points a pretty accusing finger at Rumsfeld and Co, and now Tenet has said pretty clearly the disconnect is there between what the CIA said and what Bush said.

You can't deny this, it's there on the record now. You can spin it, and try to justify it but the CIA didn't say Iraq was an imminent problem and Bush said it was. The problem here is that Bush and co have been spinning that the CIA told them to invade Iraq and it was all their fault, and the CIA has said it didn't.

Bush can't have it both ways and every way. He can say he took the CIA advice, took the worst case scenario and decided to invade now like you're suggesting. He can't at the same time say that the CIA messed up their intelligence and that's why he invaded.

You are jumbling both up like the ingredients of a fruitcake (Bush flavoured). You can pick one or the other, but you have to say which one is true and stick with that, and not leap to the other if that looks like it's going to suck people in better. So maybe Klieman is exaggerating the differences between the CIA and Bush, but it was Bush who said there were big differences, and his spin is that the CIA dragged them kicking and screaming into the war.

As the Lie Factory and countless other stories have shown Bush and co have been contemptuous of the CIA all along as being too conservative and formed the OSP to get around that. It turns out the CIA was a lot more accurate than the OSP was.

Now there's going to be an enquiry and a lot of this will come out. Bush can't just keep dancing between versions of the story whichever seems to work at the time. Either he exaggerated the CIA and other intelligence or the CIA exaggerated it and dragged Bush into the invasion, it can't be both.

Tenet said it wasn't them, so Bush can either admit he either decided to play it safe and invade or call Tenet a liar.