Idle musings

Here's something I'm wondering: even if we can give Bush the benefit of the doubt on the SOTU speech and his use of the Niger information to justify his claim that Saddam was looking to buy uranium in Africa, but only discovered afterward that it wasn't reliable (ambassador Wilson has said he called the State Department soon after the speech to warn them of this), then why did they include this information in the dossier that they subsequently sent to the UN to justify their charges against Iraq? Why would they include such obviously bogus information in a packet of evidence to be presented before Hans Blix and the IAEA?