MSNBC's Ketih Olbermann is getting dangerously close to exposing Bush's Biggest Lie - that he did not want war in Iraq.

On Monday, Olbermann exposed one of Bush's Biggest Lies, which he uttered in Cleveland (courtesy of Crooks & Liars)

"First-just if I might correct a misperception, I don't think we ever said, at least I know I didn't say that there was a direct connection between September 11th and Saddam Hussein."

Olbermann recalled Bush's 2003 State of the Union, when Bush declared: "Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda."

"Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda in the same sentence separated by seven words. Sept. 11th and Saddam Hussein -two sentences later, separated by six words. In a moment Craig Crawford joins me to discuss the fundamental remaining question. Who does the President think he's F'n kidding?

That was yesterday. Where will Olbermann go today? I just received his promotional email who subject is Bush's Biggest Lie: "Bush: 'I didn't want war.'" Olbermann's email begins:

President Bush said Tuesday there will be "more tough fighting ahead" in Iraq, but added that "we're making progress" and denied claims that Iraq is in the grips of a civil war three years after the U.S.-led invasion. He also rejected accusations that he was determined to wage war in Iraq from early in his presidency.

Bush's "rejected accusations" came from UPI's Helen Thomas (video at CrooksAndLiars.com), who is the only reporter in the entire White House press corpse to repeatedly ask Bush and his spokespeople why we're really in Iraq, since all of his "explanations" have proven to be flat-out lies.

Q I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it?

THE PRESIDENT: I think your premise -- in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist -- is that -- I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect --

Q Everything --

THE PRESIDENT: Hold on for a second, please.

Q -- everything I've heard --

THE PRESIDENT: Excuse me, excuse me. No President wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true.

Of course Helen Thomas is right and Bush is lying. The overwhelming evidence that Bush planned to invade Iraq from his first days in office - even from 1999 when he exposed his game plan to his biographer - has all been collected and documented at AfterDowningStreet.org. The Downing Street Memos are of course Exhibit A, but there is much more damning evidence beyond that, all of which has been ignored or covered up by the Corporate Media, including NBC (see below).

My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy. But we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people.

Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second --

Iraq??? Bush just said yesterday there was no connection between 9/11 and Iraq. And Helen Thomas immediately called Bush on his bullshit:

Q They didn't do anything to you, or to our country.

THE PRESIDENT: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where al Qaeda trained --

Q I'm talking about Iraq --

THE PRESIDENT: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans.

I also saw a threat in Iraq.

So Bush went out of his way to connect Iraq with 9/11 - just as he did all through 2002 and 2003, including his State of the Union - even after admitting yesterday there was no connection between Iraq and 9/11. Unfortunately for Bush, Helen Thomas called his bullshit in real time, just as Olbermann did yesterday.

I was hoping to solve this problem ["a threat in Iraq"] diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences --

Q -- go to war --

THE PRESIDENT: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it.

This of course is another one of  Bush's Big Lies, because Saddam did not deny inspectors acess to anything, and he did disclose everything. However this conspicuous and easily disproven Big Lie has been ignored by the entire Corporate Media and 99.9% of the progressive blogosphere - with the sole exception of Democrats.com and Robert Parry.

So this brings us back to Olbermann and his email teaser, "Bush: 'I didn't want war.'"

Will Olbermann dare to truly investigate and expose Bush's Biggest Lie?

Will Olbermann dare to interview Helen Thomas, the only reporter in Washington with the guts and integrity to call Bush on his lies?

Will Olbermann dare to interview the primary sources of her charges, namely former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and former Terrorism Czar Richard Clark?

Will Olbermann dare to interview Michael Smith of London's Sunday Times, who exposed the Downing Street Memos which prove Bush and his top advisors wanted war in July 2002, or James Risen of the New York Times, who confirmed those memos accurately reflected the views of CIA Director George Tenet?

Will Olbermann dare to interview Michael Elliott or James Carney of Time Magazine, who quoted Bush telling Senators " F___ Saddam. we're taking him out" in March 2002, four months before the Downing Street Memos?

Will Olbermann dare to interview Jim Moore, author of "Bush's War for Re-Election," who reported on President Clinton's final advice to Bush in January 2001 that put Osama Bin Laden at the very top of his list of priorities:

And Bush shook his hand and he said, "Thanks for your advice, Mr. President, but I think you've got your priorities wrong. I'm putting Saddam at the top of the list." This is the day George W. Bush was inaugurated, for God's sake.

Will Olbermann dare to interview Mickey Herskowitz, Bush's first chosen biographer, who famously told Russ Baker:

"He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999 It was on his mind. He said, 'One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.' And he said, 'My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.' He went on, 'If I have a chance to invade…, if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it. I'm going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I'm going to have a successful presidency.'"

Will Olbermann dare to interview those of us who created AfterDowningStreet.org and methodically connected all the dots?

Or will Olbermann's Bush-defending bosses at NBC make sure Olbermann never really gets near exposing Bush's Biggest Lie that would guarantee Bush's impeachment - and imprisonment for murder, war crimes, and treason?

We'll be watching...

Update 1: Robert Party nails it again:

Bush has uttered this lie in a variety of forms over more than 2 ½ years, yet the Washington press corps has never challenged the President directly about the falsehood. He got away with it again on March 21 when no journalist followed up the question from Helen Thomas that elicited Bush’s response...

Bush’s statement is false both in suggesting that Resolution 1441 authorized the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq – when it actually demanded that Iraq submit to arms inspections – and in claiming that Hussein “chose to deny the inspectors.”

In reality, Hussein accepted the U.N. inspectors in November 2002, granted them unrestricted access to suspected sites and announced – accurately as it turned out – that Iraq had destroyed its weapons of mass destruction.

U.N. chief inspector Hans Blix reported that Iraq was cooperating with his team and the U.N. Security Council thus refused to endorse Bush’s insistence on war in March 2003. Bush then rebuffed the U.N. Security Council, forced the inspectors to leave and invaded Iraq in violation of the U.N. Charter.

Yet, Bush has been presenting his bogus pre-war history since July 2003, three months after Baghdad fell, when the absence of WMD was becoming obvious and an Iraqi insurgency was beginning to kill scores of American soldiers.