Muzzling Muqtada

In the words of that wise man, Donald Rumsfeld, "freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things. They're also free to live their lives and do wonderful things, and that's what's going to happen here." According to the U.S. State Department Web site, www.state.gov, that is what he had to say about the chaos immediately following the fall of Saddam, as Iraqis claimed their freedom about one year ago. \nLast week while reading the Sunday papers, I was struck by an ironic story. In its quest to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq, the United States, also known as the Coalition Provisional Authority, decided to shut down an Iraqi newspaper called Al Hawza. One year after the war, the existence of freedom, much like the mysterious WMDs, is still questionable. \nOK, the paper really was bad news. It was widely considered to be the mouthpiece for an unpleasant fellow named Muqtada al-Sadr, a Shiite who had a growing following. The views expressed in the paper toward America were less than flattering, and he had been suggesting the U.S. get out of his country so he and his friends could make some improvements to the place. The last straw came when the paper started spreading ugly rumors, which Coalition authorities thought might incite violence directed at American or coalition soldiers. The New York Times reported, for example, Coalition Administrator Paul Bremer was particularly concerned by an article in the paper claiming a deadly explosion caused by a car bomb was actually the result of an American missile. So the Coalition chained the office doors shut and told them they could re-open the paper in 60 days.\nDoes closing this paper prevent such dangerous and untrue rumors? Probably not. Under Saddam, Iraqis got pretty good at communicating via rumor, since they understood all of the official sources were probably put out under the watchful eye of one of Saddam's supporters. Even without this paper in circulation, false rumors would fly. So there were few benefits to be gained from this censorship.\nWhat were the costs of closing the paper? This remains to be seen, but judging from the immediate reaction, it was probably a big mistake. A week later, it now seems closing this paper may have been the spark that started new violence -- some of the worst since major combat ended. Sadr has told his followers to "terrorize the enemy." He managed to communicate this message pretty effectively, even without his newspaper. The protests resulting from this call-to-arms killed nine American soldiers and 46 Iraqis. \nAs a student in the journalism school, I cringe when I hear the "c" word -- censorship. As a general rule, most Americans aren't too keen on the whole idea, either. It is ironic so many American ideals have gone out the window in this occupation. The ideas in the Constitution are revered because they work and they are a smart way to run a society. Free speech -- even nasty and untrue speech -- is better than violence. As long as Sadr had his newspaper, he had the ability to blow off steam and communicate with his followers, something he had never had under the former regime. When the U.S. closed down Sadr's newspaper paper, it took away this guy's only means of communication … so he found a new way of talking. \nIs freedom untidy? You bet. I guess the Iraqis will let us know what they think when they finally find some.