On Thursday, April 12, 2007 one or more bombs exploded in the heart of the "green zone," the area of Baghdad where the U.S.-protected Iraqi government resides and legislates. The bombing attacked the Iraqi Parliament's cafeteria. The attack killed three parliament members and wounded numerous others.

Such a breach of security indicates the Iraqi insurgency is gaining strength and sophistication. They increasingly are scoring deadly attacks, despite the so-called "surge" of U.S. troops into Baghdad ordered by President Bush this year.

The New York Times article on the subject, "Blast at Iraqi Parliament Kills 3 Lawmakers" (link below), quoted a few Iraqi parliament members as well as U.S. officials. Iraqi parliamentarian Ali al-Mayali of the political bloc of Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr says, "This is a great blow to the government, which is always talking about security and how it is improving with the Americans. . . . It’s a great violation of their security plan."

The New York Times article used solid journalism ethics in interviewing not just U.S. officials, but Iraqi officials both more and less disposed to favor the U.S. presence in Iraq. A journalism that does not try to interview multiple sides does not deserve its name.

That was why I was shocked earlier in the day to read an Associated Press story on the Iraqi Parliament bombing that briefly mentioned the bombing, and then reported only U.S. officials who had the most pro-surge bias. The A.P. story "Bush Condemns Green Zone Attack" by Deb Reichmann was posted at The Washington Post Web site at 11:18 A.M. on April 12. The only view expressed in the article supported, repeatedly, the official U.S. line that Baghdad security is improving.

The article quoted President Bush, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, White House National Security Council Gordon Johndroe, White House spokesman Scott Stanzel, and pro-"surge" Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz). It is amazing that a journalist that believes in journalism—not public relations—would not even quote a single Iraqi politician, an opposition political party member, or a single outside expert.

A.P. reporter Deb Riechmann only quoted people who have a proven interest in the U.S. surge into Iraq. Why would these people see the penetration of the heart of U.S. security in Iraq as anything other than further justification for sending more U.S. troops there?

Beyond this self-interested viewpoint, one also can see the bombing as indicative that many Iraqi people are against the U.S. presence. So much so that these opponents also exist in the Iraqi governmental security meant to protect the most senior members of the Iraqi government.

President Bush was quoted in the A.P. as saying that the bombing "reminds us that there is an enemy willing to bomb innocent people and a symbol of democracy." In fact, the bombing says nothing about the "symbol of democracy" and "innocent people.” It does say something about the will, sophistication, and brutality of those against the current government there.

And who is President Bush to speak about symbols of democracy?

His political party stole the 2000 election, which got him elected by 500-odd votes in Florida, after a phony felon’s list in Florida disqualified as many as 20,000 African-American voters. According to Michigan Congressman John Conyer's report on the 2004 presidential election in Ohio, "What Went Wrong in Ohio," the Republican Party in Ohio in numerous documented instances showed no respect for the actual workings as well as symbols of democracy. Where is the outrage?

This all is to say that an actual journalist--one impartial to all the players at hand--would not have solely represented the U.S. President's skewed and obviously wrong views on Iraq by only quoting the President and his White House staff. In fact this President declared the Iraq war "Mission Accomplished" in 2003.

Vice-President Dick Cheney recently was quoted again as still asserting that Saddam Hussein had ties to the Al-Qaeda terrorist network. Hello, time warp.

This White House is operating under a delusion. Whether they themselves are delusional, or simply cynical about their rhetoric behind closed doors, is beyond me to know.

What we do know is that the media--in this case that stalwart of journalism the Associated Press--is key in spreading these delusions to millions. It may look like journalism. It may shine with journalism's symbols of objectivity. Too often today, it is not.

LINKS:
1) "Blast at Iraqi Parliament Kills 3 Lawmakers." Rubin, Alissa J. The New York Times. 12 April 2007 Online 7 P.M.
www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/world/middleeast/12cnd-iraq.html

2) "Bush Condemns Green Zone Attack." Riechmann, Deb. The Associated Press. 12 April 2007 Online 11:18 A.M.
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR2007041200947.html