Peter Arnett

Born to be Wild · 03-30-2003, 09:43 PM

What do you think of Peter Arnett's reporting?

[ 03-30-2003, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]

crabbait · 03-30-2003, 10:29 PM

Man, that is one weird poll! From the little I saw, Peter Arnett reported what he believes to be the truth:

-That the first plan failed: I think this is true, since the first plan was to get Saddam with the first strike of the war while he was asleep in his bunker. In fact, the second plan failed as well as far as I can tell, since that one was to "shock and awe" the Iraqi citizens in hope of an overthrow from within and mass capitulation - that hasn't happened either.

-That we are formulating the next plan: I think this was for the benefit of his audience, since "THE PLAN", overthrow of Saddam no matter what it takes, has not changed. HOW we will accomplish the task is changing everyday, as it should, based on new facts as they present themselves. Flexibility is good and saves lives.

For those of us safe and warm at home, it is prudent to remember that Mr. Arnett is in the jaws of the tiger. His untortured survival is at the pleasure of a very fickle dictator and his sadistic sons. Telling them that they have as much chance of staying in power past Independence Day as they do of leading a parade down Fifth Avenue might prove to be unhealthy, not to mention unwise.

Flag waving patriotic talk is pretty easy to come by in this neigborhood. If I were in Peter's shoes, I would most likely find myself saying anything that would keep me breathing and above ground for another day or two.

PS: By the way DBD, if you want an unbiased "poll" it helps to have questions that do not reveal a prejudice of the outcome. It also helps if you do not have a big thumbs down sign as the heading for your topic!

[ 03-30-2003, 11:34 PM: Message edited by: crabbait ]

Born to be Wild · 03-30-2003, 10:52 PM

OK, crabait, I got rid of the "thumbs down" icon. I still think Peter Arnett is finished and embarrased Americans. Guess he got his fame & fortune, but got my disgust.

Now they are saying he is the "Jane Fonda" of the vietnam war!

Dan

[ 03-31-2003, 08:00 AM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]

Pete · 03-31-2003, 04:24 AM

I don't know why Arnett said what he did or what the quid pro quo was for his statements, but apparently NBC didn't like it and has released him from his contract. Is it possible that off camera he was at gun point and his comments were not his own?

[ 03-31-2003, 06:25 AM: Message edited by: Pete ]

Uglygreen · 03-31-2003, 05:13 AM

I saw Peter Arnetts "interview" run on FOX last night.

The man is slime. I hope his career is finished.

UG

Thumper · 03-31-2003, 05:49 AM

Bye bye Peter........ :tongue:

The Fishing Geek · 03-31-2003, 05:51 AM

Why, he's UNAMERICAN for saying such things!

The war is going great! There's nothing wrong! Onward to victory! March...march...march....march...

Kruechief · 03-31-2003, 06:36 AM

Geek,

Praise God that you are finally in line! I knew you would see the light and come to your senses.

[img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/applause.gif[/img]

Krue

Straydog · 03-31-2003, 07:00 AM

"......everything is bbbbeeeauuuuuutiful, in it's own wayyy............."

Keep those bobbin' heads bobbin', dudes!

March....march...march..... NO DESENTION!!!...march, march, march...

Thumper · 03-31-2003, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Fishing Geek:
Why, he's UNAMERICAN for saying such things!

The war is going great! There's nothing wrong! Onward to victory! March...march...march....march...

Indeed he is Unamerican for saying such things. It is wartime, and you don't go on your enemy's TV and prattle on about how your country's war efforts have failed. That is called giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and it is called treason.

Straydog · 03-31-2003, 07:13 AM

Since when did Freedom of Speech become treason?

Boy, the current administration is taking our freedoms faster than I realized!

Sea Nymph · 03-31-2003, 07:32 AM

Say what you want while you're in America. That's part of why we're the greatest country in the world. "Freedom of Speech". But, you're crossing the Traitor Line in the court of public opinion when you say certain things in other countries. Isn't that right Hanoi Jane?

It's to be expected from Clinton News Network (CNN) though I guess.

Thumper · 03-31-2003, 07:33 AM

Treason -- "(1) The betrayal of a trust; (2) violation of allegiance or of faith and confidence." Provision of aid and comfort to the enemy is a treasonable offense.

But perhaps not to Straydog.....

Pete · 03-31-2003, 07:36 AM

I suppose we should probably have a trial before we hang anyone. I'd be really surprised if Arnett wasn't at the wrong end of a gun sight ... his statement that reporters were being welcomed and well cared for seemed patently untrue. I think everyone was surprised that a 40 year veteran of 19 wars would make such unbased statements. I'm sure there's more to this story that none of us know.

Straydog · 03-31-2003, 07:41 AM

Right, we are told we are in Iraq to liberate them and make them a free country such as ours is.

However, if one speaks his mind in the country we are said to be making free, he is considered guilty of treason.
I guess once we are done making them free (which I doubt we ever will be), then and only then is it ok to speak freely.

I think it was a stupid thing to do, however, treason is not the word I would use to describe it.

Once again, ".......oh, baby, it's a big ol' goofy world......."

Sea Nymph · 03-31-2003, 08:19 AM

i figure you can say whatever you want in this country. exercise your freedom no matter how ridiculous or non-fact based it may be.

but when you dog out America or it's leaders or it's military in another country (especially one we're at war with)that's when i and a lot of others have a problem with it.

Hoosier Daddy · 03-31-2003, 09:00 AM

So let me get this straight....
Anyone can say whatever they want in opposition to the war or US policy, and that is fully covered by "Freedom of Speech". But when someone disagrees with what that person says and has an opinion about what kind of person that makes them, they have to keep their mouth shut.

How, again, is oppression of "free speech" determined? I mean, having read this kind of stuff for awhile now, I am beginning to accept that this is the way it works, I just want to know the ground rules. You know, to save time. So all of you that are "correct-thinking", maybe you can post a list of rules for those of us war-mongering redneck SOB's who might be "wrong-thinking". You know, to save time. Why waste typing out a message that isn't correct.....

It would just be much faster for you to tell us what to think. Then you could be like Arnett et al.....

After all, we need someone to tell us what to believe.....preferably a network talking head or celebrity of some sort..... :grin:

[ 03-31-2003, 10:01 AM: Message edited by: Hoosier Daddy ]

03-31-2003, 09:00 AM

Quote:

From the little I saw, Peter Arnett reported what he believes to be the truth

Fish-n-Fever · 03-31-2003, 09:34 AM

I guess no one here is old enough to remember Peter's reporting of 1 Vietnam? (fired from his job over his "style" reporting.) 2 Gulf War (fired from his job over his "style" reporting.)
It comes as no surprise to the people who came to expect this kind of negative and even damaging reports from a man of his self serving style, once again fired from his job over his "style" reporting.
I don't think for a second he had a gun pointing at him or was threatened in any way. He did what he did to gain favor (for interviews and or "scoops" of info) from the Iraqi's, just as he has done in the past with other enemies of our nation.
Ron

Ex-military · 03-31-2003, 10:25 AM

Geek and Thumper...
Of course what he said was UnAmerican...course whatever he says is UnAmerican...cuz I believe he's Australian. Seriously tho, wether it was a propaganda ploy by Iraq, or him just talking out his backside...he needed to go.

Born to be Wild · 03-31-2003, 12:14 PM

He is from New Zealand but is an American citizen. he was not under the gun and has apologized for his actions because he caused such an uproar here in the states. He also got fired for his actions. I believe he got fired from CNN for his actions during Gulf War I.

Quote:

Looks like Geraldo Rivara is geting booted out of Iraq, too.

Geraldo Rivera didn't get kicked out of Iraq and just reported from there a couple hours ago. You should have heard him slam MSBN his former employer for the rumor they started! I was in disbelief. Couldn't believe he could get away with that. The Fox broadcaster was bustin' up laughing.

[ 03-31-2003, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]

DanS · 03-31-2003, 12:32 PM

DBD,

Quote:

where the hippies sit around there sets smoking there piece pipes?

Look, if you're going to make fun of the supposed lack of intelligence displayed by these people, don't you think you should be able to spell "their" and "peace" correctly?

Just a thought........

Arnett's First Amendment rights don't protect him from getting canned by his employer(s) if they think he's not performing to THEIR standards.

[ 03-31-2003, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: DanS ]

Born to be Wild · 03-31-2003, 12:56 PM

OK DanS, I'll edit that one. Guess I was just having flashbacks from the 60's and remembering what someone had told me about the Ashland area. Or maybe it was Yreka, Cal.

You're right, I did spell peace wrong and know better. But 30 years out of high school and not into PC's and letter writing, I always get the there and their mixed up and it bothers me. Gonna have to get me a dictionary and look them up to see where they are properly used. Actually with a little thought and you pointing it out, I think I figured it out.

Thanks

[ 03-31-2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: DepoeBayDan ]

DanS · 03-31-2003, 01:10 PM

DBD,

Right on. Or write on...... Oh, heck now I'M getting all discombobulated.

[ 03-31-2003, 06:25 PM: Message edited by: DanS ]

03-31-2003, 03:34 PM

DDD,
He was fired by CNN for fabricating news
Poison Gas

More

Born in New Zealand

Straydog · 03-31-2003, 05:01 PM

Good one Dan!! :grin:

[ 03-31-2003, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Born to be Wild · 03-31-2003, 05:10 PM

Humor Straydog! I was just waiting for you to come back. Just toying with you. I'll edit it now.
:grin:

Dan

Pete · 03-31-2003, 05:12 PM

I'm glad one or two of you know what's going on ... the other 4877 of us are really confused. Maybe it was a conversation better conducted by e-mail, I dunno.

corrirod · 03-31-2003, 08:51 PM

Arnett just signed alot of Iraqi death certificates and possibly even some American soldiers' as well by making the Iraqi Regime believe they are succeeding in fending us off. This false hope will lead to more of the Regime members wanting to fight vs. surrendering and based on current statistics they will die. Because of their new motivation to fight, just out of sheer luck in numbers, they will end up killing a U.S. or Coalition soldier in the process and when that happens Mr. Arnett SHOULD be tried for treason.

This is not freedom of speech, this is endangerment to our armed forces and fraternizing with the enemy. If a U.S. soldier had done that same interview we'd have him executed for treason, why should Arnett be any different? He just does it for the attention which is a quality he and Mr. Hussein have in common.

FrogPond · 03-31-2003, 11:04 PM

Firstly, I hope his safety is not in jeopardy. Secondly, I think the statements he made and the way they were released were intended to strengthen the Iraqi resistance forces and thus hinder Coalition efforts. I beleive his statements were an act against our nation and meant to increas the danger to our troops. He is entitled to a fair trial, but in my eyes he should be found guilty of treason.

When we are at war, acting in a manner to benefit the enemy should not be tolerated.

I have heard alot about sedition (sp?) in the last few days...can anyone shed some light as to what it is or what kind of actions are considered seditious?

FrogPond · 03-31-2003, 11:08 PM

I guess if he is Australian he can't be tried for treason, but then he should be viewed as an ally to the enemy. Maybe an "unlawful combatant"? :grin:

The Fishing Geek · 03-31-2003, 11:33 PM

He's from New Zealand, whatever they call themselves down there. I mean, other than Kiwi's.

pdxkevin · 03-31-2003, 11:39 PM

What is this survey supposed to show? Since the first two questions are exact opposites of each other, the results should be as well. Do we need both questions?

Are the questions/statement inferring as to his ability as a reporter or ethics?

There is no way for me to accurately finish that survey. The last question contains two parts, which in my view are not answered the same.

Is Arnett threatened? By whom? Me? The American People? The US Gov.? Is the question implying that he was under duress while doing the interview?

Is his reporting biased? Of course. Everyone is biased to one degree or another. His believe system definately does not align with that of most Americans.

pdxkevin · 03-31-2003, 11:58 PM

Looks like Geraldo Rivara is geting booted out of Iraq, too.

Reporting is one thing. Giving away troop locations and future plans is another (on live TV).

When does it actually become "providing aid and comfort to the enemy"? How more blatant does it need to be? Weren't people shot on the feild for this exact thing during WWII? I am not saying that he should have been shot (and I wouldn't hold anyone to blame if he was under the circumstances) but he should get more than an escort to the sidelines!

This type of reporting extends the war and gets more of our guys killed. We need to end this war as swiftly as possible with as little loss of life as possible.

[ 03-31-2003, 01:01 PM: Message edited by: pdxkevin ]

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 05:37 AM

Were General Wallace's comments concerning not having enough troops and not having been trained for the type of war they actually fighting treason too?

By the way, as a point of interest, I was told that Arnett has already been hired by a British tabloid.

[ 04-01-2003, 06:41 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

The Fishing Geek · 04-01-2003, 05:54 AM

Iraqi TV has been broadcasting clips from CNN, among other US news sources, to their people to show their people how well they are doing. Should we round up all of CNN, too?

walkersteelhead · 04-01-2003, 05:58 AM

One thing he is a reporter not a commentator. And another thing his free speech rights were not revoked,he was fired from his job not being tried for treason. Even among his peers he is known as a joke. I am just glad his superiors had the sense to get rid of him. Personally I don't know why they even hired him,maybe they didn't remember his so called reporting from Desert Storm.

corrirod · 04-01-2003, 06:39 AM

I take it Straydog and TFG don't have any friends or family members over their fighting right now, I do. In fact I've got about 250,000 friends over there right now that Arnett just put in danger all so he could be heard over the Iraqi airwaves. Pardon me if I don't put him on a pedestal like some American icon.

Arnett got hired by the Daily Mirror which is the equivalent of the National Enquirer or the Globe. That's a perfect place for him to use his talents.

Straydog, in regards to General Wallace, I don't believe he gave that interview to the Iraqi television station did he?

And TFG, those clips were not sold to them, they just took and aired them out of context, much like Mr. Arnett's commentary.

STOP SUPPORTING THE PRESS AND START SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS!

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 06:51 AM

Corrirod,

I havent seen that I or anyone else has put he or anyone else on a pedestal. Is that how you look at people and life, black or white? Either we are dragging him through the dirt or putting him on a pedestal? I am truly sorry you feel the need to simplify things so, you are missing a lot in life is that is the case.

So, Gen. Wallace said those things out loud to our press which I believe is very safe to assume is being shared with the Iraqi people and that is ok but if a reporter skips the USA middle man and says it directly, that is treason.

Once again, looking at things as black or white blurs ones vision.

Please know that you do not hold the only 'caring' rights on this board. I care very much for all of our troops. In fact, I care so much I wish they were at home with their families............ so sue me.

[ 04-01-2003, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

The Fishing Geek · 04-01-2003, 06:54 AM

I'm not sure why you singled me out, corrirod, but I'll play along.

Why yes, yes I DO have friends in Iraq, thank you for your concern. And I want them to come home to their friends and family soon.

Also, I don't believe that I said, or even inferred, anything about any footage being "sold" to Iraq. They are picking up CNN, MSNBC, likely all of them. Heck, they probably even get MTV and Nick Jr. Honestly, from what I've heard of Arnett's interview I'm having a hard time discerning what he said that was harmful to the safety of our troops. He gave his opinion of what he thought was going on in the war. He didn't do anything like that bozo Geraldo Rivera who diagrammed out on live TV where his division was and where they were going in the sand.

Please, someone explain to me how Peter Arnett giving his opinion put our troops in further danger.

corrirod · 04-01-2003, 07:18 AM

TFG, I thought I already explained that,

Quote:

Arnett just signed alot of Iraqi death certificates and possibly even some American soldiers' as well by making the Iraqi Regime believe they are succeeding in fending us off. This false hope will lead to more of the Regime members wanting to fight vs. surrendering and based on current statistics they will die. Because of their new motivation to fight, just out of sheer luck in numbers, they will end up killing a U.S. or Coalition soldier in the process and when that happens Mr. Arnett SHOULD be tried for treason.

Do you not see how this could endanger our troops, our friends? Because of that I take Arnett's actions VERY personally. And yes Straydog, I do only see this issue in black or white! I prefer not to waffle. He screwed up and he even admitted it himself so why are you trying to protect him?

I didn't single you out TFG, you and Straydog seem to be the only ones on this thread still defending Arnett's actions. You picked your side, not me. I'm just directing my opposing viewpoint to the opposition.

The Fishing Geek · 04-01-2003, 07:33 AM

Okay, I saw all that but it still comes down to the fact that he is nothing more than a television reporter. He's not a military strategist, nor is he a US official. This isn't meant to be a slight towards the media, but let's keep things in perspective here!

I truly believe that the reaction that Arnett is a traitor is horribly overblown. Yes, he showed questionable judgement by giving the interview. No, he does not have, nor will he have, blood on his hands because of his statements.

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 07:39 AM

Thats right C, he did screw up, admit it and has been fired for it. But that does not appear to be good enough for you. You seem to want his head on a platter. I cannot agree.

BTW, did you simply choose to ignore my post where I said it was stupid or did you just miss it in your reading?

FrogPond · 04-01-2003, 07:47 AM

From what I have heard the Iraqi people are shown and told only what their government wants them to hear. (Isn't that one of the reasons why we are over there?)

I think we are experiencing a luxury with the openness of the current reporting we are getting "live"...After the Geraldo incident I expect things will get a little tighter...

I believe that everyone uses information to their benefit...it is called SPIN. The Iraqis will use the information that serves their purpose as will the Pentagon. I think we should all expect that by now.

Uglygreen · 04-01-2003, 07:49 AM

Right on Rod.

Its simple. If the Iraq leadership or armed forces see his interview as a reason to continue to fight, and more people (American or Iraqi) die because of it, the blood is on his hands.

That is unamerican. The current reality is that the antiwar folks lost the debate, we are now at war. Our men and women are in harms way. As an american the focus should now be to conclude the war as quickly as possible with the least cost in human life.

Mr. Arnett, because of his comments, may cause additional death on the battlefield (both ours and theirs) and that is the part that is unamerican.

Real people are dying, and Peter seems to have forgotton that.

Save the who was right and who was wrong for later. When the war is over the truth will come out.

Besides being unamerican, it was unprofessional. Why is a reporter giving "interviews" anyway. And none of this "professional courtisy" crud, that doesn't fly. He was trying to be a big shot, shooting his mouth off in an attempt to curry favor with Iraqi officials. Without a thought to the real consiquences of his actions.

UG

Plus what is a "reporter"

04-01-2003, 08:10 AM

TFG,

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 08:10 AM

UG,

You profess to know a lot about being a reporter in a hostile country during a time of war with same country. I am curious when you got this experience to be so knowledgable about the ins and outs of this profession in times such as these.

I am also curious why I am not seeing a cry for Geraldo's blood as well.

corrirod · 04-01-2003, 08:29 AM

Quote:

You profess to know a lot about being a reporter in a hostile country during a time of war with same country

I didn't see that anywhere in UG's post, are you just arguing for the sake of arguing Straydog or do you have some substance to add to this thread. If not then get off it. I may not agree with all of TFG's opinions but at least he provides explanations to back it up, not just spew to get people riled up.

DanS · 04-01-2003, 08:54 AM

Quote:

That is unamerican

Uh....sorry, but I don't think your are the Chairman of the "Who's un-American Committee".

Arnett a traitor? Please.

He got what he had coming......he was canned. But spare me the traitor talk, it just doesn't fit the case.

Uglygreen · 04-01-2003, 09:05 AM

Dan S. I have specifically avioded calling him a traitor. I said that he is slime, and should lose his job.

Is providing "encouragement" to the enemy (Iraq) that may cost some of our soldiers their lives the American way? I don't think so, most people would probably agree with me I think. If you think his actions set an example for Americans to follow why dont you explain why?

Straydog, I look at what the other reporters have done in times such as these in the last hundred or so years and find none that do what he has done. If he did nothing wrong, why was he canned and why did he apologize? Too little too late, there some things that "I'm sorry" doesnt fix.

UG

[ 04-01-2003, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: Uglygreen ]

Albacore Tuna Captain · 04-01-2003, 10:18 AM

All this bickering about freedom of speech and being a traitor plays exactly like what is happening in the world. Many people feel we shouldn't be in Iraq. Many feel we should because of their belief that if Saddam is not stopped now, he will use his weapons against us or other nations. He has the track record for invasion so why assume he will change? The fact is that the world is having a hard time to see why we are here in the first place because of misinformation. We all base our beliefs on the information we recieve from all sources. And when that information is bias, untrue, misleading, patently false or what ever you call it (and please don't ridicule me for my spelling because I don't have the time to look it up) then it serves only to help evil and continue the controversy. Saddam Hussein's regime is right up there with the most evil dictatorships in history. ANYONE supporting this regime is only provoking more death on innocent people. I have served in combat and I hate it. I feel horrible that our troops are in a foreign country fighting to liberate a people who could not free themselves from this discusting murderer. But someone has to do it! It wasn't going to be the French, Germans or Russians who have contracts to protect. It has to be done by a people who respect the freedoms we have. So when a person like Peter Arnett abuses the rights he has and goes against his adopted country and reports lies, twists the facts to support is biased positions and gives aid to a regime that subjugates a people, all for the sake of sensational reporting, he is a traitor to all of us. He was hired by CNN to report. THat reporting is suppose to be the truth. Not his twisted opinion. Defend his right to say what he wants, but don't defend his lying. Defend his right to speak out against what he doesn't approve of, but don't defend his abuse of the media as if he was an all knowing garu. Peter Arnett is a poor excuse for a journalist. He deserves to be where is now, reporting for the likes of the Globe, Star, Enquirer and other rags, reporting pure garbage and calling it journalism. And remember, those reporters who were telling the truth were all asked to leave Iraq. Is it not appropriate that a regime that continuously lies allows a liar to stay and report?

DanS · 04-01-2003, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Is providing "encouragement" to the enemy (Iraq) that may cost some of our soldiers their lives the American way?

Actually, it IS the American way....for some Americans. It's not the way I think an American should be, but you really don't want me to be the guy that decides either.

Making Arnett out as a traitor is akin to thiinking the First Amendment should protect Arnett. Neither argument has much validity.

Albacore Tuna Captain · 04-01-2003, 10:53 AM

IT IS NOT THE AMERICAN WAY MR DANS! It is not okay for some Americans to do things that will harm other Americans. That is why we have laws, that it why we prosecute those who break them. If it is deemed necessary to prosecute someone for treason, they will have to be proven guilty. Until then, they are innocent. But for someone to have the opinion that Arnette may have committed treason is no more wrong than for you to think he hasn't.

It's the way of traitors! IF you can't see the difference, maybe you need to study the law. At any rate, it is not mine or your place to find guilt, but we can have an opinion.

04-01-2003, 10:57 AM

There are responsibilities that come with rights and the First Amendment has some limits.
Arnett is skum.

Born to be Wild · 04-01-2003, 02:20 PM

True, true. I don't think he is guilty of treason but a very poor journalist or idiot. Maybe that's why he has got fired so...many times. Unfortunately he has created more danger for our troops for his rediculous comments for reasons already stated. Good ridance Pete.

Someone made comments about some interviews by a general and others in the states. I only wish the Iraqi soldiers and civilians were alowed to watch Fox and CNN. Then we would no doubt see a lot more surrendering and uprisings as they realized they were getting defeated big time. That's the truth that Arnett should have reported. And not to mention it was done on Iraqi TV where all the Iraqi's were allowed to watch. Was Arnett aired by Al-Jazeera also?

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 09:23 PM

Corrirod,

UG said "And none of this "professional courtisy" crud, that doesn't fly. He was trying to be a big shot, shooting his mouth off in an attempt to curry favor with Iraqi officials. Without a thought to the real consiquences of his actions."

I think that implies he knows more about what is going in the reporters mind in this reporters situation than he probably does.

I think it shows diregard for the fact that there are many circumstances under which this could have been said that UG has never experienced and therefor is rather presumptuous to say he did for the reasons UG accuses him of.

Sorry I am not more clear in my substance. I tend to think and speak in abstract more than some. I will try to make it easier for you to understand in the future.

[ 04-01-2003, 10:45 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Straydog · 04-01-2003, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Uglygreen:

Straydog, I look at what the other reporters have done in times such as these in the last hundred or so years and find none that do what he has done. If he did nothing wrong, why was he canned and why did he apologize? Too little too late, there some things that "I'm sorry" doesnt fix.

UG

Who has said he did nothing wrong? I have not seen anyone write that.

I have said more than once that it was stupid. I think it was wrong. I think he got fired for doing something wrong. I do not think he commited treason as has been suggestged. Some seem to think there should be further consequences, I do not.

[ 04-01-2003, 10:47 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

corrirod · 04-01-2003, 09:58 PM

Quote:

I think it shows diregard for the fact that there are many circumstances under which this could have been said that UG has never experienced and therefor is rather presumptuous to say he did for the reasons UG accuses him of.

Sorry I am not more clear in my substance. I tend to think and speak in abstract more than some. I will try to make it easier for you to understand in the future.

What circumstances? Arnett apologized and said he shouldn't have said those things. Perhaps you are the one being presumptuos thinking he was under some kind of duress? He has lied before to make a story, why wouldn't it be feasible that he lied again?

It's not my lack of understanding that's the problem it's your inability to comprehend why we would consider his acts treasonous. When American/Coalition soldiers die because of what you said, that's treason in my book. I'm pretty sure I'm in the majority on this issue so I'm done with this thread.

DanS · 04-01-2003, 11:04 PM

Okay, Mr. Albacore Attorney-at-Law.....I suppose you are the Chairman of the "Who's un-American Committee"? No? Then HAVE your opinion about what's un-American.....who cares?

Has Arnett been stripped of his citizenship? Has ANYONE (besides our legal scholars at iFish) talked about charges of treason being brought against him? No? Hmmmmmm.

Maybe that's because he's guilty of being an idiot...not treason.

corrirod · 04-01-2003, 11:19 PM

Unfortunately we won't be able to measure the number of American or Coalition soldiers that will be killed because of Little Pete's interview so in that respect your right Dan, he won't be tried for treason, but he should.

If only one Iraqi soldier saw that interview and decided to continue to fight rather than surrender then what Peter did was treason. Granted, I'm sure O.J.'s attorney could get him off but that still doesn't make it right.