NOYB equivocated:

Remember, the key statement in Bush's speech was "the British Government has
learned...". Since MI6 *still* stands by their original intelligence, then
Bush's statement is 100% accurate.

Depends on your definition of "is". Really.

Do you see some sort of major moral difference between simply making a false
statement and repeating a statement (known to you and your advisors to be
false) made by somebody else to achieve the same effect?

You can weasel around and say, "But Bush himself was not informed! He's too
stupid to follow intelligence briefings from the CIA! His staff and cabinet
were able to hide the facts from him!" Fine. If so, should such a man be
POTUS? And even so, the SOTU speech is a speech outlining the positions of the
Bush Administration, was written by the Administration, and Bush is ultimately
responsible for the actions and activities of his underlings.

Where the moral high ground now? You Bush fans ought to be ashamed to defend
this bald faced manipulation.