Iraqi elections "in peril." (An example of slanted reporting from WP)

[Julien Sorel]

The United Nations has failed to fully staff its operation in Iraq, imperiling the timing and quality of the elections there and forcing inexperienced Iraqis to take the lead in preparing for the country's first democratic balloting, due in January, U.S. officials and election experts said.


So it's the U.N.'s fault -- those slacking bastards at it again. Probably the French had something to do with this. But wait!

But the United States and the United Nations are now caught in a diplomatic Catch-22, U.S. and U.N. officials and election experts said. The Bush administration is disappointed in U.N. reluctance to deploy more staff, while the U.N. is frustrated that the United States has not quashed the insurgency, leaving the country too dangerous for foreign election workers.

So it's a "Catch 22." But is it? A Catch 22 is circular in nature: A needs to happen before B can happen, but A cannot happen until B happens. Of course, the classic example of Catch 22 comes from the novel, where the flyer wants to get out of flying by claiming insanity, but the fact that he wants out is viewed as proof he isn't insane.

Clearly, there is no circle in the Iraqi situation: the U.N. cannot reasonably be expected to oversee elections without having a secure environment for its workers, and the U.S is responsible for creating that environment independent of any U.N. involvement. But the WaPo went out of its way to create a circle anyway, in order to absolve the U.S. of blame, and create a "balanced" story, even where balance does not exist.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6277250/

[ogradda]

1. * never makes mistakes!

it's not his fault! gotta be someone else's!:eyes:

[tom_paine]

2. Yawn. Just more "reporting" of uncut Rovian Pravda

Up is Down, Comrades.

Return to your daze.