Iraqis were used to censorship and untruths from their government. The country's information minister Mohammed Saeed al Sahaf was made famous for touting Iraqi victories over U.S. forces even as the troops marched into Baghdad.
So it was a welcomed change when Americans declared victory and politicians and military leaders started dropping the buzzword "freedom."
President Bush wanted the world to know that the greatest achievement of the war in Iraq was that Iraq's people would be free from Saddam's control. Americans were quick to jump on this bandwagon and rightfully so. The freedom of speech and of the press is a vital part of any society.
In fact, it's an idea that we Americans like to think was invented by our founding fathers. Patriots are always proud to tout America as the greatest country in the world because of these rights. The reality is that these ideas are not an American trademark and instead are drawn from the human spirit.
But don't tell the patriots that and please don't tell them the Iraqis and the Canadians are beating us at our own game.
Shortly after Saddam's regime fell, Americans set about helping the Iraqi people rebuild their country. One project was to get Iraqi television back on the air and let Iraqi journalists, censored for decades, freely report the truth to the country.
The journalists were at first skeptical and hesitant about criticizing the government or the American military but soon realized that "freedom" means just that. To help the Iraqi journalists learn this concept several advisers were brought in to grease the wheels for the station.
Unfortunately, the advising crew also included some political figures involved with the U.S.-led Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA). This group suddenly started making demands and asked permission to view content before it was broadcast over the airwaves.
The Iraqi Media Network postponed a news show over editorial disputes including a supposed attempt by Americans to prevent a reading of the Quran, the Muslim holy book, on the air.
Anyone see a problem here? Anyone see a contradiction?
What's worse is, it wasn't an American who stepped to the forefront to fight for the freedom of the press. It was Canadian documentary maker Dan North who is advising the Iraqis at the station.
"As journalists we will not submit to censorship," he said. "We will not accept an outside source scrutinizing what we produce."
Patriots, this should anger you. A Canadian seems to understand the very ideals that have become our trademark in a much better way than our leaders seem to practice. And here's the kicker, the Iraqi journalists needed only one month to grasp the concept.
The Canadians and Iraqi's get it, why can't the Americans?
Because now the shoe is on the other foot and America has a supposed reason to censor the media. In an already violent country, an investigative television crew could fuel the flames of anti-Americanism. Iraqis want their country to themselves and if their journalists are free to express that opinion, it could spell trouble for American forces.
The military's fear of what the journalists will write also speaks volumes about what is really happening in Iraq.
But by far the worst things that go along with censorship are anger and distrust. The Iraqi journalists will not stand for U.S. censorship just months after escaping Saddam. In their eyes, if the Americans continue to censor Iraqi media then their country hasn't changed much. Only the face of the tyrant has changed.
Different accent, different flag, same forked tongue.
Cameron is a journalism senior. Reach him at cameron.eickmeyer@asu.edu.
