G
gilliam
Guest
or why you should always be careful reading MSM:
On the eve of the election in Iraq, the Associated Press went around the world, looking for people who didn’t think anything good would come of the democratic process there. The AP’s article, datelined Paris, is titled “Skeptics Question Worth of Iraq Election.” It begins:
Is an election guarded by U.S. forces and marked by assassinations and car bombs better than no election at all? As Iraqis living abroad started casting ballots Friday, that is a divisive question, with skeptics dismissive of U.S. arguments the election could plant the seeds of democracy for the Middle East or be free and fair with American soldiers standing guard.
But who exactly are these “skeptics?” The AP quotes a handful of individuals and a couple of newspapers–not exactly a meaningful sample of world opinion. Let’s take the AP’s “skeptics” one at a time.
The first one is “Gaza City resident Hassan Sarhan,” who says: “You can’t have free and fair elections under occupation. They simply don’t mean anything…It’s all a sham.” Hassan Sarhan offers no explanation of why this should be true, but it’s probably not hard to find an anti-American in Gaza. Whether he has any particular insight into the situation in Iraq is another question; the AP offers no clue as to who he is.
The AP’s second “skeptic” is Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah of Lebanon, who says: “It is difficult to hold free and honest elections in Iraq under the shadow of U.S. occupation.” The AP doesn’t identify the “Grand Ayatollah” further, but in fact, he is the "spiritual leader" of Hezbollah. There’s a shock: Hezbollah doesn’t like elections, or American policy in Iraq (or anywhere else).
The article gets better. Read it all here:
powerlineblog.com/archives/009353.php
On the eve of the election in Iraq, the Associated Press went around the world, looking for people who didn’t think anything good would come of the democratic process there. The AP’s article, datelined Paris, is titled “Skeptics Question Worth of Iraq Election.” It begins:
Is an election guarded by U.S. forces and marked by assassinations and car bombs better than no election at all? As Iraqis living abroad started casting ballots Friday, that is a divisive question, with skeptics dismissive of U.S. arguments the election could plant the seeds of democracy for the Middle East or be free and fair with American soldiers standing guard.
But who exactly are these “skeptics?” The AP quotes a handful of individuals and a couple of newspapers–not exactly a meaningful sample of world opinion. Let’s take the AP’s “skeptics” one at a time.
The first one is “Gaza City resident Hassan Sarhan,” who says: “You can’t have free and fair elections under occupation. They simply don’t mean anything…It’s all a sham.” Hassan Sarhan offers no explanation of why this should be true, but it’s probably not hard to find an anti-American in Gaza. Whether he has any particular insight into the situation in Iraq is another question; the AP offers no clue as to who he is.
The AP’s second “skeptic” is Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah of Lebanon, who says: “It is difficult to hold free and honest elections in Iraq under the shadow of U.S. occupation.” The AP doesn’t identify the “Grand Ayatollah” further, but in fact, he is the "spiritual leader" of Hezbollah. There’s a shock: Hezbollah doesn’t like elections, or American policy in Iraq (or anywhere else).
The article gets better. Read it all here:
powerlineblog.com/archives/009353.php
