Three versions of the report on Iraq were prepared, all of them concluding that Saddam Hussein was a major threat. But the first, long, classified one was peppered with reservations. A declassified version that was given to Congress erased most of the doubts. The even shorter public version had no caveats at all.

Decoding the Senate Intelligence Committee Investigation on Iraq

Many politicians who voted to authorize the war still refuse to admit that they made a mistake. But they did. And even though this page came down against the invasion, we regret now that we didn't do more to challenge the president's assumptions.

It's hard to tell for sure if this is just a tactical political manuever or a measure of true intellectual honesty on display. (Perhaps it's both.)

To the extent it's the latter, I find it interesting that the public probably has Jayson Blair to thank for (indirectly) bringing about this new approach.

A Pause for Hindsight

The president could help restore confidence in the government's risk assessment by simply being frank about the errors his administration made and the lessons it learned. That would do more to prepare the country for the next crisis than a full season of scary press conferences by Mr. Ridge.

The Senate Report | NYT Editorial

This is the (redacted) full text of the 521 page report. The PDF is 24 MB. (BTW, the Senate web site is remarkably well-connected!)

There is plenty of news media commentary and analysis to read on this topic, if you're not reading into the report. (Remember, most people don't read, and even 26 percent of people with graduate degrees don't read.) Still, a first-hand look at the report reveals details unlikely to be mentioned in a page one story.

For example, in the major section on the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, there is a subsection entitled "Detainee Debriefings" in which three cases are reviewed. Two of the three are well known senior level officials: Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Shaikh Muhammad. The identity of the third detainee, and the analysis of his/her debriefing, remains secret and is redacted in the report. This suggests that the Agency (or a third nation) has undisclosed senior al Qaeda officials in its custody.

Report on the US Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq [PDF]

The report concluded that these visits were not perceived by analysts as efforts to pressure them, but other intelligence officials said such high-level visits often forced analysts to simplify complicated subjects and gloss over internal doubts.

Senate Report Does Little to Still Debate on CIA's Prewar Data

Mr. Bush gave as good as he got, once his Irish was up. But Ms. Coleman remained resolute. It may have cost her a follow-up interview with Laura Bush. But the griping and debate about the interview was a sad reminder to Americans that the White House seldom welcomes robust questioning, especially when it is most needed.

When Irish Eyes Stop Smiling

The rulings [have been] widely described as the court's most important holdings in decades on balancing national security with personal liberties.

Whistle House Says It's Addressing Court Concerns on Captives

Caution: top spin ahead! Look out, Maria Sharapova!

No dangerous terrorists are going to get out of detention because of Supreme Court decisions handed down June 28.

Whew! That was a close one. You really had me going there for a second.

That being said, going forward, we still might possibly have to begin considering the necessity of the eventual release of an unspecified number of allegedly non-guilty bystanders. You know, at some point.

"No one's being released as a result of the decisions. In fact, the Supreme Court reaffirmed our authority to detain enemy combatants."

Get somebody in here to disengage his reality mediator, stat!

Terrorists Will Not Be Released

Respondent Jose Padilla is a United States citizen detained by the Department of Defense pursuant to the President's determination that he is an "enemy combatant" who conspired with al Qaeda to carry out terrorist attacks in the United States. We confront two questions: First, did Padilla properly file his habeas petition in the Southern District of New York; and second, did the President possess authority to detain Padilla militarily. We answer the threshold question in the negative and thus do not reach the second question presented.

Jose Padilla v. Donald H. Rumsfeld

These two cases present the narrow but important question whether United States courts lack jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in connection with hostilities and incarcerated at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba.

Shafiq Rasul v. George W. Bush, and Fawzi Khalid Abdullah Fahad al Odah v. United States