New York Times is trying its best to save Bush of political damage. They had an article yesterday, or the other day, in which they asserted that Iraqis still consider American occupation forces to be liberators and, LISTEN TO THIS, their "tutors on democracy." We are going back in times. Even the French occupation of Algeria was not that vulgar in discourse (they were, in fact, but go along with my polemical overstress). When I am on the road, I get to see more of US TV news which I normally avoid thanks to my three satellites at home (and do not forget my satellite radio--and satellite toaster oven): I saw a panel at the Bush Presidential library at A&M University in Texas (not to be confused with M & M University in Detroit). It featured John Burns of New York Times and Gen. Tony Frank: I swear that John Burns (a British citizen) was more patriotic and more gong-ho than Gen. Frank: Burns tried his best to assure the audience that Iraqis love, and are in love, with George W. Bush. John Burns also almost bragged that he does not know any of the Middle East languages; he forgot to add that he does not know anything about the Middle East either, and it shows. New York Times tell us that schools are refurbished and open in Iraq: UNICEF paid for many of the renovations, and Newsweek adds that many of the US renovations were badly done. The occupation voice, the insincere and annoying Kanan Makiya: urged on Charlie Rose that US arrests tens of thousands of Iraqis: and this pro-democracy advocate also called for the arrest of those who appear on AlJazeera and oppose the US occupation. He did not forget to add that he is opposed to the election of the constitutional council in Iraq; of course, he is opposed: left to their free choices, Iraqis would never elect people of his ilk. Oh, and Bush is saying that he is making progress in Iraq.