Three Sacramento State government professors marked the two-year anniversary of the war in Iraq by discussing its misconceptions at a town hall meeting in the Hinde Auditorium on Wednesday.

They spoke to a full house.

The war in Iraq was not to bring democracy to the Middle East, but about profit for the United States said Bill Dorman, Sac State government professor.

Dorman, Bill Fozouni and John Syer talked about how the Bush administration pressured its intelligence analysts to “confirm what Bush wanted to hear,” Syer said.

“A great deal of blame must be placed on the White House,” Syer said. “There was a change in intelligence processing.

“Because they had a change in process, they were able to do what we call ‘cherry picking,'” Syer said. “If they found a report that suggested the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, they could take it out and say, ‘See, there’s weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.’ Any reports to the contrary could be ignored.”

Fozouni, a native of Iran, spoke about how the people of Iraq and the United States have very different definitions of democracy.

“(The U.S.) cardinal assumption is that democracy comes in a standardized package, which is universally applicable to anywhere,” Fozouni said. “And once applied, it can spread infectiously and produce peace rather than chaos. This is flawed on several counts.

“There is no question that the ideals of democracy are popular universally and especially in the Middle East,” Fozouni said. “Indeed, most Middle Easterners, because of being deprived, have a stronger yearning and a greater appreciation of liberty than a typical individual in the West.”

Fozouni went on to say that “no state has the capability to overhaul the world.” He said democracy was a code word for U.S. domination.

Dorman blamed the media for the misconceptions of the American people. He said the mass media is “for profit, not the truth.”

He blamed “high security” Democrats as well as Republicans for the war in Iraq. He also said that we must “hold on to historical memory,” and “remember that the Reagan-Bush administration, for eight years, considered Saddam’s Iraq to be a reliable ally.”

After all three of the professors spoke, they took questions from the audience. One student asked how the problem in Iraq could be solved.

“Our expertise is identifying problems, not solving them,” Fozouni said jokingly.

Syer warned that the U.S. “must not damage the credibility of the new Iraqi government,” and take careful steps to withdraw. He also said that more money should be going in to rebuilding Iraq instead of building U.S. military bases.

Some students found the one-sided talk less thought provoking than it could have been.

“I think they should have had both sides,” said Omar Alami, international business student. “No, we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq, but just telling one side is not good. Most people are trying to find out the truth. Hearing both sides would have been good.”

Cameron Gauthier-Steele, criminal justice major, said he found the meeting interesting.

“We got a lot of false information from our government,” Gauthier-Steele said. “There was a lot we didn’t hear about that went on behind the scenes.”

Ramzi Mahmood, Sac State professor of civil engineering, was born in Iraq. He was not asked to speak, and said he hadn’t heard about the meeting. Initially, Mahmood was against the U.S. going into Iraq, but said, “Regardless, it happened.”

“We have to deal with what is, now,” Mahmood said. “If you ask me, should the U.S. pull out, I’d say, absolutely not. I was against Saddam Hussein’s regime, and he’s out. That is good. Now, Iraq needs some time to stabilize the new government, and they need the U.S. presence to do that.”

Karen Marie Watson can be reached at [email protected]