Let's get real here, there are people in Iraq bent on destroying innocent civilians. Terrorist are strapping bombs to themselves and killing innocent people and you are worried about the army paying the papers to run factually stories?

A free press is the cornerstone of democracy. What the Pentagon is doing is propaganda and is against the tenents of democracy.
The Uinted State's actions in Iraq opened the door for terrorism to flourish there. Don't forget that it was the United States, in the 1950's, who toppled the democratically elected government in Iraq and installed Saddam Hussein as dictator.
We all reap what we sow, and for the U.S., chickens are coming home to roost.

It was Iran in the 50's, we toppled Mossadeq and installed The Shah.

Iraq wasn't until 1979/80.

But yes, free press is the cornerstone of a democracy - very good point. The tactics the military stands accused of is the very actions we claim to be against. I guess, the "do as I say" rule is in effect again.

If the story said: "The US has been seizing printing presses, arresting journalists, and burning illegal newspapers" then I'd be up in arms. If the story said: "All Iraqi newspaper articles must be approved by US before they can be published" I'd be pissed. As far I can tell from what the article says, the Iraqis are free to publish whatever they want. That's the essence of a "free press" isn't it? The "cornerstone of democracy" isn't being assailed; there's no censorship here. To call what we're doing an assault on free press is an unnecessary overstatement and a political cheapshot.

At worst, we're taking advantage of shoddy Iraqi journalistic practices. Take this quote for example:

"Ultimately, Baldawi acknowledged that he, too, was concerned about the origin of the articles and pledged to be 'more careful about stuff we get by e-mail.'"

How many US newspapers will publish a story that I (an unknown source) email to them?

One Iraqi editor felt duped, not that he'd published American propaganda, but that he didn't get paid enough to do it:

"Zaki said that if his cash-strapped paper had known that these stories were from the U.S. government, he would have "charged much, much more" to publish them."

I think this is a sin of the same order of magnitude as your average Marine Recruitement brochure.

The funny thing is the Bush Administration has already been busted doing the same thing in OUR newspapers, so why is this a surprise to anyone on the planet?

There is TONS of evidence about this, with one link below:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june05/gallagher_1-27.html

Restoring honesty and integrity to the White House is what they promised... Saying that they've failed is a HUGE understatement.

The problem is not about the order of magnitude of the sin in the eyes of conservative Americans. It is how it will be viewed by the citizens of Iraq. The problem is that this further diminishes the credibility of the U.S. military. The same goes for the torture of prisoners by the U.S. military. Conservatives will argue about the merits of torture, but the fact is that the torture of suspected Iraquis causes Iraqis to lose confidence in U.S. forces, that is if they even had much confidence to begin with.:/ Also the use of cluster munitions in populated areas which have killed many innocent civilians further damages the reputation of our military. The point is not how Americans feel about these issues, but how these actions effect Iraq.

The integrity of the United States is at stake here... what integrity we have left. :(

During my recent interview with ancient Chinese philosopher and curmudgeon, Lao Tzu, he revealed to me that all this stuff is really very, very old hat.

Hi all, interesting thread. I will like to repeat a common refrain from the Asians. We are pro-US but no pro-Bush and we vehemently disagree with his government's domestic and international policies that he insists on tagging on to the name "democracy" such as freedom of the press.

In my country, it is generally acknowledged that there is no free press i.e. columnists get lambasted for criticising the actions of the government and intellectuals get heavy-handed criticism from the people in power for their public views. This has become a situation where our newspapers have to rely heavily on reprinting news feeds from international and US organisation, even their commentaries.

This releases them from the onus of being responsible for their published articles, while letting us readers finally read what the government does not necessarily wants us to hear about its policies and allies.

As such it is sad for me to find out that the US presidency can condone such overt state propaganda by creating stories from nowhere like Cpl Pat Tilman or slanted ones, while still unashamedly espousing the values of democractic freedoms in Asia.

The press stays free for a few important reasons. One, as a check on a government that abuses its mandate from the people as the fourth estate after US president, Congress and Senate. Two, to provide conflicting views on reality where people can draw their own conditions. Lastly, they provide information from objective sources. You don't have anyone of this, you don't have free press.

I have never bought into the pitch that freedom can only be protected at the cost of suspending other freedoms. What the US presidency is doing now is providing ammunition to non-democractic regimes in their fight to deny basic freedoms to their people.

And aren't they afraid that people will find out about the truth? And the truth should matter in democracy. Only totalitarian regimes ignore truths and punishes critics.

I'm afraid that 3 more years of this and US will never be regarded as a world leader in credible issues. People may not even believe the announcements your leaders make, especially after the WMD fiasco. That's already 1 little-boy-cry-wolf too many.

Kindly note that no one in Asia understands why anyone wants Bush as presidents. Our worry is that his voters share his views and what does that say about the American dream and democracy?

Hope? Or fiction?

Apologies for my rambling

Point of view: If you in the United States of America truly believe you have a completely free press with no restrictions or "political & big business" influences then you need to go back to sleep and wake up in the real world.

What is going on in Iraq in regards to a controlled press is not new. Feeding controlled information to the "masses" has been the modus operandi of governments and businesses for centuries - do you really think it is any different now?

Consider the statement that history is written by the victors. Do you not think that news is written by those in power?

The US propaganda machine ran at full tilt during the 50s to thwart the threat of communism - and in reality, Russia and the USSR was never a real threat - it was only the desire of the military industrial complex, that Eisenhower warned against, that was rushing the world headlong into a possible nuclear confligraton so that they could realize more profits. The USSR was only trying to keep up and respond ot the threat. (And, no, I am not a communist supporter - just know the history).

If you really want to be pissed at someone for controlling the press you need to look at big business AND big government in collusion to accomplish their joint agendas. Consider the fact that Bill Gates has never ever said that his operating system is the worst product in the friggen world and if it was a car, it would have been recalled a long time ago. All you hear about is how philanthropic Billy Boy is. That is controlled press.

Integrity in government is an oxymoron. Integrity in Iraq by government and supporting special interest businesses is a non sequitur in regards to our country's integrity being at stake.

Iraqis have been lied to by the press for at least 28 years. So this is nothing new to them.

What I want to know is how much of what Al Jazerrra has reported is factual. I feel much of it is. No wonder Dubya wanted to bomb their offices.

my 20 p

Kestral, this was not rambling, these were very lucid thoughts and comments. I think that the reason some Americans support Bush is because of party loyalty. His ratings are the 30 percentile now, but he still has 3 more years nonetheless.

By the way, I will apologize in advance on behalf of some of my fellow U.S. citizens if some right-wing nut job responds to your thoughtful post with some inflammatory nonsense.

Hey Norm,

Do you test your page on Opera 8.5 (latest:free) browser, Opera.com, because lately your page has been crashing Opera. And its not the plugins, because i tried it minus them and its still crashing.

So iv had to resort to IE, oh noes!

Great site, cheers

Aww wait it was the plugins ... um, but its only started crashing lately. Im pretty confident i havnt changed anything.

Sorry.

Hi Jo and YankinOZ, thanks for your comments and no worries, I'm not troubled by criticism as I think the issues of democracy, freedom and religion have become divisive issues, rather than universal themes that strike a common chord.

I have to say again that we Asians are pro-US, but not pro-Bush. Only our governments are pro-Bush, which is ironic when they should be ruling with the consent of the masses with our anti-war and anti-Bush protests and demonstrations. Trust me when if any party in Asia champions an anti-gay, anti-abortion, pro-fundamentalist approach with insane economic views, we voters will vote with rotten eggs. If the US elections are conducted like World Idol, all of Asia will have voted with Kerry because he can be reasoned with.

Principled is only good if the person comes with real principles. No one should vote for wilful stubbornness as such people can be weapons of mass destruction in positions of power. Notice the damage Bush and his crew did to US reputation as leaders in environmental protection, human rights, democracy and multi-lateralism

But I digress. YankInOz has valid points about the lack of substance for real press freedom in the world. But my question would then be, "Why promote it then as a democratic freedom?" Is it a worthwhile ideal to pursue in the world? And if it is, shouldn't the person promoting it set an example to the rest of the world?

Until the reason is yes, I can safely tell you that journalism will never truly be seen as a reputable occupation. People respect teachers here more, which is the opposite situation

I do agree with your sentiments that Al Jazerrra reporting has more credibility in the world today i.e. 50 million views just like BBC. The reporters are reporting on the ground and on the scene of the battles and riots.

And I think they did the right thing by allowing publication of Bin Laden's announcements. You can argue you are for free press when you want them to report from the US official position, which unfortunately isn't believable these days. No offense intended.

This also gives 2 ways of looking at the Middle East picture and allows us to understand where the Islamic militants (terrorists has become US word) are coming from.

There's a good article on how US government created the Middle East mess by salon.com:

www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112805E.shtml

My apologies for the long post

Balance this with the fact that during the time when Rumsfield was an envoy to Iraq when it was an ally of US, US companies took a leadership role in supplying materials for Saddam's chemical WMD programme.

Just 2 points of clarification:

Until the ANSWER is yes, I can safely tell you that journalism will never truly be seen as a reputable occupation IN ASIA. People respect teachers here more, which is the opposite situation IN US.

• You CAN'T argue you are for free press when you want them to report JUST from the US official position, which unfortunately isn't believable these days. No offense intended.

"A free press is the cornerstone of democracy"

Just another one of those catchy phrases people say. The 'cornerstone of democracy' is a vigilant people. Free press just gets you muckraking and constant headlines about Britney Spears' baby. Tell me how 'free press' is always a good thing, when the very nature of any press is to root out the worst parts of humanity. Remember the catch phrase - if it bleeds, it leads.

In this case the military isn't making anything up. It's just trying to put a positive spin on facts. I have no problem with that, since it only balances out the natural negative spin that sensationalist reporters add to sell copies. People don't seem to realize that this type of stuff happens in all wars. WWII was a prime example of this, spinning positive headlines as thousands of Americans died in the dirt in countries they'd never heard of.

I swear if you libbies would stop living in such absolute terms, you might actually be able to get something done - like maybe affect policy.

Are you talking about the same kind of positive spin FOX tried to put on Iraq about when they kept parroting the famous line by Cheney "last throes" Real positive and upbeat, but complete pile of steamy crap.

Glad our Democracy has that cornerstone too :) Makes me proud, Joe

Did you happen to actually see the stories that were being pushed as "true" and "upbeat" Do some checking and get back to us.

"A free press is enshrined as a cornerstone of democracy in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution"~~ said by Richard Lugar, that hippie libbie from Indiana ;)

"A free press is a cornerstone of our democracy"~~said by that other hippie libbie, Ronald Reagan http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1982/100682a.htm

It always astounds me that people think it is the absolute, final word in any argument to quote someone famous.

Just pointing out that it isn't just hippie libbies who use what you call a catch phrase.

Hi all, at least now people got bloggers who can replace free press in their own way.

It astounds me when people quote others on this Blog and twist the meaning of their words.