The freedom of Iraqi speech

George W. Bush has kept his public relations team busy for the past three years. They have had the monumental -- and unique -- task of selling two separate wars during the same presidency. As we all know, they didn't encounter many problems during the lead up to Afghanistan. But they ran into all sorts of protests for the Iraq war. Now they must sell the peace to the Iraqi people.\nBut some people just aren't buying it. This, of course, is for many reasons. Some are former Ba'athists lost loved ones in the war, and many simply do not like having their country occupied.\nAn important aspect in all this is the media. It has the capacity to bring photographs, information and opinions into every city and every home. And it has the ability to shape peoples' views with the way it spins events. In some instances, media outlets have been instrumental in inciting, and dissipating, conflict.\nFree access to independent news outlets is a new-found freedom to the majority of Iraqis. Until now, Saddam Hussein was the only legal source of information. These days, it is a slightly different story. One of the perks of the American invasion and occupation is Iraqis can draw from thousands of news sources from around the world.\nIsn't it ironic that a freedom we gave them is now causing us so much trouble? The problem Bush's PR team faces is a diversity of opinion. When an average Iraqi logs on to the Internet, he or she can see much more than the British Broadcasting Corporation extolling the virtues of democracy. They can also see photographs of blood-soaked children and listen to the advice of Osama Bin Laden on Al-Jazeera's Web site.\nIt is not hard to see how Al-Jazeera's slant could generate some animosity toward the Americans. It is also not hard to see how much easier life would be for the coalition if it began to tote the official line coming out of Washington, D.C. So, as the military occupies the country, why don't we shut Al-Jazeera down?\nA student posed this question to my Middle Eastern history class last Tuesday, and I must admit, I was shocked. Never mind that Al-Jazeera is based in Qatar, and, as far as I know, we have not invaded it yet. And disregard the fact that, as a journalism student, I have had "freedom of the press" beat into me with a sledgehammer.\nThe point still remains -- this is an insanely bad idea. \nFirst of all, it would look incredibly suspicious and raise even more hell if the military suddenly began to control the news. \nSecond, we are trying to install a democratic system of government. The only possible way for democracy to function is with an informed populace. Limiting information would doom the infant Iraq before it ever takes its first steps.\nMost importantly, I sincerely doubt Al-Jazeera makes up its stories. The New York Times may not run front-page photos of dead babies, but that does not mean they don't exist. Like ABC or FOX News, Al-Jazeera has the right to publish stories with any spin it wishes. We have no right to silence its reporting simply because the spin does not agree with Washington's agenda.\nThe U.S. Supreme Court verified this for America in Gertz v. Robert Welch. In short, the court ruled there is no such thing as a wrong opinion and, therefore, nobody could be silenced for having one. So, in America it is extremely difficult to censor a medium for the way it portrays events.\nI realize Iraq is not America and does not have the First Amendment. However, we should give the country we are building the same rights we expect.