WaPo unrights itself, kind of

Coinciding with the embarassing blogging debacle with home-schooled wing-nut Ben Domenech (advice: the guy should sue his parents for not teaching him about the evils of plagiarism), the Washington Post hosted an on-line discussion with Noam Chomsky on Friday

First question out of the gate:

Arlington, Va.: Why do you think the US went to war against Iraq?

Noam Chomsky: Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world, it is right in the midst of the major energy reserves in the world. Its been a primary goal of US policy since World War II (like Britain before it) to control what the State Department called "a stupendous source of strategic power" and one of the greatest material prizes in history. Establishing a client state in Iraq would significantly enhance that strategic power, a matter of great significance for the future. As Zbigniew Brzezinski observed, it would provide the US with "critical leverage" of its European and Asian rivals, a conception with roots in early post-war planning. These are substantial reasons for aggression -- not unlike those of the British when they invaded and occupied Iraq over 80 years earlier, at the dawn of the oil age.

My advice to WaPo: Give Noam the vacant blog spot.