Replies

Reading the transcript, if in fact it was the entire transcript, is not the same as seeing the actual interview. In my opinion, his mannerisms in the interview were very sympathetic to the Iraqi regime.

As far as you saying in a post that I just read by you that you didn't see anything wrong in what he said, let me ask you this:

#1, How do you suppose he is correct in saying that our first war plan failed and that our generals are now taking a week off to rewrite the war plan? He couldn't possibly know if ANY war plan failed because he hasn't seen any war plans.

#2, How could he be correct in saying that we are taking a week off? He couldn't possibly "know" that and there is absolutely no evidence to back up what he said - in fact, there is an abundance of evidence all over the tv from the embedded reporters that he is absolutely wrong.

#3, He took credit for being responsible for the anti-war movement in the U.S by his broadcasting the civilians that are killed by the coalition attacks. How could he possibly "know" that any of the coalition attacks have killed any civilians in Iraq? And as much as he likes to think he is responsible for any anti-war movement in the US, those started well before Peter started broadcasting anything at all about civilian casualities the he claims were from coalition attacks. The coalition wasn't attacking anything when the anti-war movement began in this country.

As far as his firing being censorship, the government is not who shut him up, his employer was. That is not censorship.

As far as you saying in a post that I just read by you that you didn't see anything wrong in what he said, let me ask you this:

Did I say "wrong" or "false".

He said " ARNETT: That is why now America is re-appraising the battlefield, delaying the war, maybe a week, and re-writing the war plan. The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance now they are trying to write another war plan."

How is that any different than waht is being reported here by all the arm chair analyists? #2, How could he be correct in saying that we are taking a week off? He couldn't possibly "know" that and there is absolutely no evidence to back up what he said - in fact, there is an abundance of evidence all over the tv from the embedded reporters that he is absolutely wrong.

I also hear it reported here that we were taking a breather in order to regroup.

If you are referring to this

For that reason, the Pentagon keeps saying that the civilian casualties, particularly in Baghdad in the last three or four days, at the market places -- the Pentagon says -- well they are Iraqi missiles that land amongst the people. They keep saying that, but of course the Iraqi government says they are clearly cruise missiles that hit the population.

He appears to be stating each sides posistion only.