Arnett fired

033103 | NBC

[dep]

"It was wrong for Mr. Arnett to grant an interview with Iraqi state television," said NBC in a statement. NBC, MSNBC, and National Geographic have all fired him.

Arnett on live, apoligizing to "NBC, MSNBC, National Geographic, and the American people." He then goes on to say that all he said in the interview was "what we all know.

[dansangel]

He then goes on to say that all he said in the interview was "what we all know."

Some apology. The idiot got off easily, IMHO.

[dansangel]

LOL----nicmarlo, you ROCK!!!!

[jonascord]

The Bazillions the networks charge for advertising is the bottom line. If everyone starts tuning to other channels, jars of peanut butter, packages of cookies, bars of soap will go unsold. Will Arnett's lies sell diapers? Can you sell an SUV right after the news tells you your country is doomed?

Zip your Nomex suit all the way to your chin and hunker down... Stupid does not go unanswered 'round here!

[nicmarlo]

ty dansy....so do you! : )

[Yaelle]

Oh, come on. Three French networks have probably already emailed him job offers.

[stands2reason]

I didn't know he was an American.

[lilylangtree]

Upon waking up this morning and hearing this news was the best I've heard in several weeks. Great news! The action to fire this schmuck was superb.

[M. Thatcher]

No, YOU lose when you have no argument whatsoever.

[SendShaqtoIraq]

1)He stated that his reports were designed to increase the anti-American, anti-Bush sentiment
2)He did it on public television
3)Not only are there two witnesses, there are MILLIONS
4)He bolstered the morale of the enemy.

All four conditions are met.

[VRWC_minion]

No, YOU lose when you have no argument whatsoever.

I stated my argument. It was wrong for Arnet to be fired because of what he said in an interview. You disagree and call me names instead of having a rational discussion.

If the benefit of a high IQ is to use logical fallacies instead of having a rational dialogue then I'd rather stick with my lower IQ. I'll at least learn something new.

[VRWC_minion]

)He stated that his reports were designed to increase the anti-American, anti-Bush sentiment

Source please.

[SendShaqtoIraq]

Reporters aren't hired to spout their "points of view." They are hired to report the news. That means facts only.
If they want to express "points of view" they can write letters to the editor of various newspapers, or write editorials.

[Allan]

If you arent American, why not fly your country flag in your profile? :)

Because I despise the country in which I live
and I don't want to be identified with it.

[smith288]

Canada, eh?

[VRWC_minion]

Reporters aren't hired to spout their "points of view."

Then a reporter should never be allowed to express his personal opinions when not reporting ? That isn't logical. The issue with Arnett wasn't his reporting. But now that you mention it, many reporters in this country made the same points and it was those points that Arnett reiteritated.

[Redbob]

Arnett wasn't fired for "stating the facts."
He was fired for editorializing, for sympathizing with our enemies, and for using his position to launch a personal attack on our President.
Per Fox news, "He said the Iraqis allowed him to stay in Baghdad because they respect him and 'see me as a fellow warrior.'"
How would you classify someone who calls himself a "fellow warrior" with our enemies?
Surely not a "journalist?"

[Sam Cree]

"It just seems to me his right to express his opinion no matter how much I hate it is his right."

He does have the right and his bosses have the right to fire him if he endangers the stockholders' investments. IMO. And he still has the right to express his opinion. He can get right back on Iraqi tv and do it again anytime he feels like it.

Agreed on Daschle.

[Redbob]

"He stated that his reports were designed to increase the anti-American, anti-Bush sentiment
Source please."

Gladly.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82656,00.html

Read the whole thing.

[PoisedWoman]

. It was treason and he should be put on trial.

Yes, I agree he should be prosecuted. During WW2, "journalists" in Tokyo and Berlin who spouted similar messages on radio directed to our troops were consdired war criminals, and I believe they faced tribunals at the end of the war.

Does anyone know whether Arnett can actually face charges?

[al_c]

Arnett & The Toxic Avenger

Funny! But he could be Young Frankenstein's monster instead ....