|
I agree the edits smell foul, and don't match Annan's "no-edit" promise, but it could simply be that they don't have solid evidence pointing to the individuals. Leaving uncertain names in the report, even with other solid facts, would make it easy to discredit as a whole. Better to let the public froth while the Syrian government drowns in denials.
Now for the paranoid section: I'm having trouble with the continual stupidity of people "forgetting" about edit history. Hasn't this been covered in Sleazebag-101 for 15yrs? It's easier to imagine the edits being left intentionally.
1) Someone else left the edits to shaft both the Syrians and Annan. Looks bad for Annan, and when the general public finds out the original report names individuals, it's worse than if the names had been included. This version carries rumors the UN couldn't prove, but Syrian denials lend credibility. Rumors can be worse than official charges.
2) Annan did it on purpose. He knows they don't have solid evidence, but he wants the charges aired. He can sidestep the edit mini-scandal. I'm not a fan of Annan, but would he have attained his position by being stupid?
Okay, I'll stop.
__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195
|