Is there anyone out there still believing in the honesty of our country’s decision to invade Iraq? It’s a silly question. Of course true believers still exist. But as the days go by, that seems to be an increasingly silly belief to hold.

For four years we’ve chronicled in this space the evidence against the Bush administration’s claims: former treasury secretary Paul O’Neill’s comments; the Downing Street memos; the forgery of the Niger documents; the cherry-picking of intelligence to make a case for war, etc.

There are more reports that were never listed here, such as statements made by President Bush about attacking Iraq when he was still on the campaign trail. The “slam dunk case” shouldn’t refer to Iraq’s non-existent weapons, but to the President’s decision to invade.

Illinois senator Dick Durbin finally spoke out on the topic last week, saying, “The information we had in the Intelligence Committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn’t believe it.”

Thanks, Senator Durbin, for hiding behind your pledge of secrecy. At least none of your children are among the 3,351 American troops who have died from deceit. Now former CIA director George Tenet is talking about the lack of debate before the rush to war.

So many bits and pieces have fallen together over the years to create an increasingly clear image of the decision to go to war. More details will surely follow, even as the Administration continues to deny them.

Why does it matter to endlessly discuss this issue? What purpose can be served by criticizing the Administration again and again about what some have described as the most serious tactical blunder in U.S. history?

The answer, obviously, is so it doesn’t happen again. We must understand what occurred, how it occurred, how the media helped it slide through, how we were made to feel like traitors for even questioning the decisions.

It’s essential to lay it all out and dissect it in hopes that we won’t be hoodwinked again.