Do These Articles Make the Case Against Bush in Iraq? Part II

BYT regards accusations by Paul R. Pilar (in this WaPo article) as damning evidence. I think Pillar's accusations should give us pause, but it is unreasonable to give them more weight than that. Time and time again, BYT gives more weight to those with whom he already agrees, with no other discernable criteria for validity. Pillar was a man of high rank, yes, but so is the Pres., VP, Sec of Defense, etc. BYT supports his argument of Bush lies with the accusations of Pillar. Fair enough, but then but then his argument that Pillar's side is more valid than Bush's side? Here is some opinion on Pillar for better, (strike that, I got tired of trying to find better opinions of what Pillar said; they are not abundant) or worse, or worse, and also worse. Here's more, with an interestingly trivial note that the author was Pillar's roomate in the past.