PETER JENNINGS

... I think Americans believe that there are millions of Iraqis who would be free, who would be happy to live free from the leadership of President Saddam Hussein. Do you believe that to be the case?

DR. MOHAMMED MOTAFFER ADHAMI

... during the British occupation, Iraqis were suffering. And the British were stealing our oil. It seem that now, the Americans want to do the same.

Thanks for the post, Glenn. This particular section that I've selected reminds me of Charlie Rose's interview, where Sinan Antoon emphasizes that:

1) The "reason" for invading the war changed many times. The above quote clearly indicates that invading Iraq was never perceived by Iraqis as something related to WMDs, and that the MSM was already making an excuse for the Bush administration by citing freedom from Saddam because they realized the argument of WMD was too weak.

2) The oil sector is, sadly, the only well-functioning infrastructure in Iraq now.

Even more revealing is Charlie Rose's vehement reaction to Antoon's observation about the oil sector. Which simply strengthens Antoon's argument of political amnesia: obviously Rose is trying to sell the idea that America was liberating Iraq from a dictator despite the fact that America had a colourful history of supporting dictatorships in the Middle East.

is almost as hard a task as it gets. I live in China, and here, supposedly "paid" workers are almost treated like slaves sometimes. The worst example is in the construction sector. Despite all the talk about how fast China is developing and building new infrastructure, the construction workers' incomes have not really changed. Many work under a contract of one year and do not get paid until the end of the year, which means that they won't get paid if they get sick or have to stop work in the middle of the year. In fact there have been some instances where construction workers have committed suicide because of this dire situation. That's a key issue in slavery: it may be relatively easier for the government to combat underground operations because they are not as organized, they practise blatant slavery, and are generally smaller. It becomes really hard if workers are hired by a company and then refused their salaries or humane treatment, because those companies seem legitimate.

Spot-on, Glenn, but I would have liked for you to discuss more about the moral implications of Mukasey's lies. It's truly disgusting to hear about Mukasey "crying" about the 9/11 victims to sell his lies about wiretapping. Simply disgusting. Of course, nobody cares because he's displaying "patriotism". In fact he's doing the opposite. Using such an emotional event to manipulate people who are not as informed as Glenn is about FISA and federal courts into supporting him is unspeakably immoral. He's essentially taking advantage of the victims' fates to push for telecom amnesty and protect the telecoms' corporate interests. Those poor souls must be rolling in their graves.

Okay, I get that some readers find Baby Einstein to be convenient when they are busy. An effective alternative is a children's CD. They're cheap and they don't use graphics and motion to overstimulate children. They're also extremely interactive and convenient- you can stop the CD at any time you like. Kids love hearing music over and over again. Soon, they learn to sing along, which will simultaneously improve their verbal and musical skills.

McCain marks the absolute outer ideological boundary of American militarism, imperialism and war-making, particularly (though not only) in the Middle East.

As he certainly does. The problem is that MSM and the most of the rest of us define centrist differently. Ultra-conservatism and religious zealousness has become the norm that anyone who raises even a tactical objection to the Iraq war is a centrist relatively speaking. Actually, I think the reason people label McCain as a centrist has more to do with the fact that he's not as religious zealous as a Republican candidate is now required to be (not that anyone will admit that this is the true reason). It is actually Clinton and Obama who are really centrists if we compare them with other politicians in the rest of the world. What being a centrist constitutes needs to be better defined, or MSM will continue to get away with publishing this sort of nonsense.

Compared to the Western world, yes, that would seem a valid observation, especially economically speaking. Compared to the rest of the world, I still think they would be centrists.