Anyone else getting sick and tired of all these chickenhawks trotting out the same tired and factually incorrect information to rationalize their wrong-headed acceptance of PNAC's agenda? Again and again, I have to wonder why these people continue to get platforms to rationalize how wrong they continue to get it. Stirling Newberry at The Agonist dissects that drink-soaked Trotskyite popinjay Christopher Hitchen's latest diatribe:

The four year mark from the invasion - the war had begun the summer before has brought out the worst in dishonesty and stupidity. Perhaps the most bloated self-parody has always been (Christopher) Hitchens, the token left wing warnut who is trotted out as proof that everyone was really in favor of invasion. Let us count the lies that this fat lying liar spouts.

First note that Hitchens throws himself cream puff questions, then, notice how he can't even answer his own questions honestly.

Was the president right or wrong to go to the United Nations in September 2002 and to say that body could no longer tolerate Saddam Hussein's open flouting of its every significant resolution, from weaponry to human rights to terrorism?

That isn't why Bush went to the UN, he went to the UN for enough permission to invade.

Note the lie in his reply:

The Security Council, including Syria, voted by nine votes to zero that Iraq must come into full compliance or face serious consequences.

But Iraq was brought into full compliance without invasion.