Juan Cole, one of the best bloggers around on the Iraq imbroglio, weighs in on the Tenet controversy--ie allegations by former CIA director George Tenet that Bush came into office determined to have a war against Iraq. Cole links to several old (circa 1999 and 2000) examples of President Bush's preoccupation with Iraq even before he took office, and then asks: "How much clearer could it be that Tenet is absolutely right that there was never any serious debate about the merits of 'taking out Saddam' in Bush's inner circle?"

This is a great way to contradict Ms. Rice's defense of the president not wanting to invade Iraq, whereas eh had, on the other hand, a jonesing for avenging the attempt on his dad's life eons before 9/11!

This piece brings together several different sources over a period of time. It makes a clear point from the material in the primary sources.

Mostly evidence, not much comment needed, to refute recent statements by Condoleezza Rice. Good job bring the evidence together and linking the sources.

This is a straight forward replay of previous interviews and quotes to demonstrate Bush's early preoccupation with "taking out" Saddam Hussein. Juan Cole certainly has a discernable point of view but he writes dispassionately.

The piece is well written, except the title gives the opposite impression unless you already know Rice was lying.

The story didn't really give Rice any chance to respond to the allegations after her initial comments. I was looking for her response and I did not see it. As much as I would like to believe all this I consider it pretty much an opinion piece; and I've long ago learned to take opinion pieces as light on documentation.

Cole's article counters the administration's spin quite effectively. Cole refers us to his article in Salon from May, 2005, "The lies that led to war." The earlier article reviewed extensive, authoritative evidence of Bush's fixation on Iraq.