In an earlier post, DougR suggested the completed report would be critical of Bush. It isn't absolutely clear from that whether Doug is acknowledging Bush to be a crook, but on who won't be esposed as such until it's too late, or is simply rubbishing those who are authoring the report. Maybe he could clear that up.

I'm willing to wait for the report before making up my mind about Bush, particularly since Kerry doesn't sound a lot better than Bush anyway. But what seems clear already is that US and UK intelligence (regardless of how and by whom it was interpreted) was hopelessly inadequate as the basis for a war. The lesson must be that even in this hi-tech age, there is no such thing as perfect intelligence, and therefore intelligence alone should never again be the basis for going to war.