This Little Brother Is Watching the WSJ

So much for objectivity in the mainstream media, huh? Here’s another great example of a supposedly a non-commentary, independent “reporter’s” article that is so laden with subjective under- and overtones that it makes my skin crawl. From the Wall Street Journal (you know, that supposed “capitalist” newspaper):

Volcker Probe Is Unable to Resolve
Questions Regarding U.N. Officials

By YOCHI J. DREAZEN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
September 8, 2005; Page A2

You only have to read the frickin’ title of the thing to see that it’s going to be a defense of Kofi Annan, that corrupt leader, of that corrupt bureaucracy called the UN. But it gets better (worse, that is), starting off with the first paragraph:

A sprawling report into the United Nations' scandal-tarred oil-for-food program derided the world body's management of the program as corrupt and inefficient, but was unable to definitively address politically explosive questions about the personal culpability of senior officials there.

The italics are mine. But if you read this report (just skim it, if nothing else) http://www.iic-offp.org/Mgmt_Report.htm, you’ll see that the Paul Volcker team “definitively addresses the politically explosive questions about the personal culpability of senior officials there”. I about fell out of my chair when I read the second and third paragraph, which immediately and directly followed that first one above: <>

“The 800-page report from the independent panel headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, which was officially released yesterday, said the mismanagement and outright criminality allowed ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein easily to exploit the humanitarian program for financial gain, with his cash-strapped regime wringing $10.2 billion out of the system through a combination of smuggling and illicit kickbacks and surcharges. (See the full report.)

"Obviously there was corruption, and obviously there was mismanagement," said Mr. Volcker in an interview. "If the U.N. has a special responsibility in a corrupt world to provide an example by maintaining ethical standards, they fell far short."

Uh, doesn’t that just about give you a “definitive address of the politically explosive questions about the personal culpability of senior officials there”? Was Mr. Volcker mincing words? Do I suddenly not understand English? What the hell is the WSJ and this jokey Yochi guy talking about?!

In the next paragraph:

Mr. Annan's management of the world body during the program's tenure was "a litany of deficiencies," he said.

Do I have to comment on the continued irony?

Heck, the article even tries to pull a “hey look over here! This other stuff isn’t corruption that’s too bad!” by moving from the outrageous multi-billion dollar UN-Saddam-cahoots scam to the still-plenty-outrageous topic of:

The report said the younger Mr. Annan used his family name to communicate regularly with U.N. procurement officers -- including one close family friend, Dianna Mills-Aryee, who he referred to as "Aunty D" -- while Cotecna was finalizing its ultimately successful bid for oil-for-food work. Kojo Annan also saved nearly $20,000 on a new Mercedes by buying it in his father's name, enabling him to receive a diplomatic discount and have it imported to Ghana without paying customs duties, the report said.

In his statement, the younger Mr. Annan says the car incident was an "indiscretion" and that he was sorry if it embarrassed his father.

<>Wow, geez. I guess if he apologized to his poor victimized father for the “indiscretion” (what the rest of us would call a crime of corruption!), the whole thing should be okay. Got it, WSJ and Yochi. Thanks for the objective reporting.

Hey, mainstream media -- Little brother is watching you!!