[VRWC_minion]

< flame suit=on> This is a lynching and we should not be a part of it. I don't think Arnett should be fired. Censoring is not what our country is founded on and similar words have been mouthed by Jennings and all the rest.

[Skywalk]

Yeah because darn, I always find myself getting on the state-controlled TV station of the enemy and telling that that resistance is giving fuel to the anti-war segment and that the war plan has failed.

Jennings at least has the cover that he is not going on Iraq's state TV and saying what he does.

That's the difference. Heck Hanoi Jane could have said a lot of things, but when she went on NVA radio condemning American troops as war criminals, guess what? she became a traitor.

[William McKinley]

Bullspit.

It is not censoring to hold people accountable for their actions. If one actively participates in enemy propaganda, it would be derelict of the public to not reject him as completely as possible. He should become radioactive for any position that relies on doing business with the public.

[M. Thatcher]

I don't think Arnett should be fired.

I completely agree. Treasonous bastard should be hung from the neck until dead.

If his comments aren't treason, the word has no meaning.

[blastbaby]

Not going to flame you.

As the media are wont to say every chance they get - we just report the news in a fair and balanced way.

When news media become celebrities and start believing their own press - well, it leads to this.

I think the media itself turned on him - remember there are missing reporters in Iraq. I agree with someone on another thread that stated "this is BIG BOSS outrage".

Reporters should be reporting - fine, give both sides - but anytime they bring in their personal attitudes they run the risk of being attacked. There is a difference in my mind between reporting the news and making the news. Peter crossed that line (and seems to have done so in the past).

[SamAdams76]

This is not a case of censorship at all. I'm glad Arnett said what he said and I encourage all the anti-Americans who feel the same way he does to speak out so that we can know who they are as well.

As a subscriber to National Geographic, I exercised my right to free speech by telling them in no uncertain terms that I would cancel my 15-year subscription if they kept Arnett on their staff. As for NBC and MSNBC, I couldn't care less because I don't watch that garbage anyhow.

[Beck_isright]

"< flame suit=on> This is a lynching and we should not be a part of it. I don't think Arnett should be fired. Censoring is not what our country is founded on and similar words have been mouthed by Jennings and all the rest."

Censoring? Since when is protecting your economic interests (in this case NBC's) censoring? Not to mention the fact this was not done in the USA like Jennings the quisling does; this was done in a nation where we are at war. The rules are different when my friends are dying. Lose the flame suit and don the moron suit for that statement.

V

[CatoRenasci]

No, this was more. It was acting directly as an accomplice to enemy propaganda. I think it is appropriate for MSNBC, NBC and National Geographic to fire Arnett.

The more interesting question is whether Arnette's behavior is actionable. Some have suggested he is not an American citizen, rather a New Zealander. If so, he cannot be charged with treason. New Zealand is not a member of the coalition; they're sitting this one out, so there are no New Zealand charges that could be brought, as far as I know. The question would then be what grounds are their for the US charging him with a crime? I suppose we could try simply arresting him as an enemy propagandist and try him as a war criminal for attempting to undermine our war effort. Or, perhaps it would simply be better if his efforts to leave Baghdad were unsuccessful and he was turned over the the Kurds.

[Publius6961]

and similar words have been mouthed by Jennings and all the rest.

NOT in enemy territory, and interviewed by a sandmaggot in Iraqi army uniform!

If you can't see the difference...

[Otta B Sleepin]

This was not just a case of someone exercising freedom of speech. By praising Iraqi resistance and saying that the war plan was failing, Arnett was actually encouraging stiffer resistance and fueling the resolve of the homicide bomber/terrorists. His words undermine the Coalition efforts to persuade Iraqi fighters not to resist or obey orders to fire on Coalition forces, putting our soldiers at even greater risk.

Arnett's interview went way beyond writing or filming an op-ed disguised as a news feature for an American newspaper or TV station. Arnett functioned as a tool of the Iraqi government, the same government that has not only deprived and brutalized its own people (and continues to do so) but has tortured and executed American and British prisoners.

[sandlady]

I usually agree with your posts. Consider this, when the enemy names a mosque for him, you have to figure he helped them somehow.

[Howlin]

similar words have been mouthed by Jennings and all the rest.

Then consider this a shot fired over their bow.

[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!