Peter Arnett, Cretinous Liar

Media Research Center ^ | April 2, 2003 | Brent Bozell III

[Mr. Mulliner]

Peter Arnett, Cretinous Liar

by L. Brent Bozell III April 2, 2003

In 1995, then-CNN star Peter Arnett told The American Spectator’s John Corry that "Rush Limbaugh is the king. He is also a cretinous liar, with off-the-wall opinions. And he has the audacity to call himself a journalist."

Arnett was half-right: Rush is the king of all media. But the rest of that diatribe doesn’t describe Rush. It fits Arnett -- to a T.

You won’t hear that from the princes of our press corps, now tiptoeing silently away from Arnett in embarrassment. Arnett was deified by the media establishment even after (or was it because?) he trashed America from Baghdad in Gulf War I, delighting his Iraqi censors with bizarre stories like the one about American soldiers shooting at the arms and legs of innocent Iraqi shepherds.

When Arnett’s book "Live From The Battlefield" was released in early 1994, his colleagues veritably swooned. New York Times reporter Bill Keller lauded Arnett as the "quintessential war correspondent of our half century." Newsweek Senior Editor Russell Watson called him "the best war correspondent of his generation."

The only explanation for Arnett’s long-overhyped reputation is the triumph of politics over professionalism, and hype over substance. The media elite had found themselves a hero: a reporter "brave" enough to claim that America was an evil player on the world stage, a nation that could drop cluster bombs on civilians or gas its own soldiers. The charges made were defective in their veracity, but electric in their audacity, and that’s all that mattered to a press corps starving for role models.

The truth is a stubborn thing, however, and it’s winning out. After years of being celebrated as a world-class journalist, Peter Arnett has developed a talent for getting fired. When he made the outrageous decision to go on Iraqi TV to praise the freedom granted by his Iraqi censors and tout how the U.S. war plan "failed," he was fired not only by NBC, but by MSNBC, and National Geographic News –– a triple-sacking. He apologized on the "Today" show for his "misjudgment" in choosing media platforms, but not for his Baath-Party-friendly orations.

Arnett should have been fired for the stupidity of his claims to Iraqi television. The first war plan "failed" and the Pentagon’s writing another plan? To reach that conclusion one must have working knowledge of a plan Arnett has never seen. There’s a "growing challenge" to President Bush? Polls haven’t slipped since the war began, and continue to hover in the stratosphere. Iraqi propaganda ministers allow a "degree of freedom"? Tell that to the American reporters and photographers who were abducted and imprisoned by "Information Ministry" goons.

The real mystery was not why NBC & Co. fired Arnett. Why did they hire him in the first place?

CNN also fired Arnett in 1999, almost a year after his role in another anti-American debacle, as star reporter on the program "Valley of Death," which claimed that U.S. forces knowingly killed their own "defector" soldiers with nerve gas in Laos during the Vietnam War. In that case, CNN folded on the veracity of its dastardly claims like a tent.

But still there were no apologies from Arnett. Instead, there was pathetic excusifying: "I was never informed that my face on the air gave me responsibility for a major story," said the allegedly brave reporter. "I’m a company guy. You want me to read a script, I’ll read it."

His reporting for CNN during the first Gulf War displayed a very similar and equally casual disregard for the veracity of his stories -- so long as America was the target. On a March 21, 1991 story on ABC’s "Prime Time Live," Arnett was questioned about the possibility that the Iraqis were disguising a chemical plant behind that infamous "baby milk factory," Arnett countered dismissively, "Why would they go to all the trouble of doing that? Was their nuclear weapons plant disguised as a bagel factory?" Throughout the ABC interview, Arnett revealed his reporting was based upon lame suppositions, not actual knowledge. When asked about a military command center he called a "civilian shelter," he admitted: "I didn't go deep down. I really didn't have any equipment for digging. I just, to this day, I can't really believe that was a command center."

It took Arnett just hours after his sacking to find another venue, and in no time at all, he was back at it, charging he lost his job because of a "right wing media" conspiracy. Arnett also suggested that "Some reporters make judgments but that is not my style. I present both sides and report what I see with my own eyes."

Arnett’s new employer is the Daily Mirror of London, one of the most radical anti-American tabloids in the world. A perfect fit for a cretinous liar.

[Mr. Mulliner]

You know you're over the line when your anti-Americanism causes any sign of embarrassment among America's media elite.

[Mr. Mulliner]

This is a ping. This is only a ping.

[William McKinley]

Your hero, in all his glory.

[js1138]

Rush has never called himself a journalist.

[William McKinley]

Hey, part of this begs a question

"I’m a company guy. You want me to read a script, I’ll read it."

Did Iraq pay him to do that interview?

[martin_fierro]

"I?m a company guy. You want me to read a script, I?ll read it."

Yeah, that's the one Arnett line that I'll never forget. Some libel defense he had there.

Along the same lines, I'm disappointed to not hear FOX News make any mention today of Whorealdo's expulsion from Iraq (although Britt Hume was absent from his show today -- I'm hoping there was a conference call with Roger Ailes & Rivera concerning Rivera's continued employment there).

[Clemenza]

Arnett was half-right: Rush is the king of all media.

Would you like to weigh in?

[Bullish]

I'd sure love to do a little "interview" with comrade Arnett.

[VRWC_minion]

If you think he is my hero from my comments then your half as smart as he is.

[ez]

Rush has never called himself a journalist.

Right. A tactic typical of leftist arguments. (ie "Why does the President want to bomb the Iraqi people?")

[William McKinley]

I am sorry, I could not resist throwing some sarcastic needling your direction. After all, you were the one arguing that he was so truthful.

[Joe Bonforte]

Bozell did not point this out (surprisingly), but Arnett was nailed for his "I only read the script" position on Tailwind. Investigation proved he had a very active role in writing the script.

[VRWC_minion]

After all, you were the one arguing that he was so truthful.

Yes, I argued that his statements in the Iraq interview were true and that his opinions were the same as those mouthed by many liberals on our local news. I never argued that he hadn't lied before or that his opinion's were rational.

[William McKinley]

Clearly he lied at least once in his report. Support for the war is increasing, not decreasing.

[Peacerose]

It's in the next to the last paragraph.

[Howlin]

From the LA SLIMES:

NBC, he said, "was just grateful for anything I could give them" and used him up to 20 hours per day. "But in the end, I was thrown out on the street, and very casually, my reputation in shreds -- for what? For helping them out."

An NBC News spokeswoman said Tuesday: "Yesterday, on the 'Today' show, Peter Arnett said that he had made 'a stupid misjudgment.' And he apologized to us and the American people. We'll leave it at that."

Asked about that sober apology, Arnett said: "What choice did I have? I followed a young woman who was crying over the loss of her husband in a suicide attack." He called the situation "bizarre," noting, "I was fired on the 'Today' show, the most popular morning program."

[Joe Bonforte]

Sorry, but I don't see anything about the Tailwind scandal in that paragraph. The third one from end repeats his defense ("You want me to read a script, I’ll read it."), but there's nothing I can see about the evidence that he actually helped write the script.

Perhaps I didn't make it clear. Bozell pointed out Arnett's defense on Tailwind, but failed to discuss the evidence that this defense on Tailwind was a pack of lies.

[Landru]

"It took Arnett just hours after his sacking to find another venue, and in no time at all, he was back at it, charging he lost his job because of a 'right wing media' conspiracy."

HA!!
ummmm Petahhh?
What worked for "the lady in pink" ain't gonna cut it for you, y'know.

Then, here's what's really got me in a quandry.

"But still there were no apologies from Arnett. Instead, there was pathetic excusifying: 'I was never informed that my face on the air gave me responsibility for a major story,' said the allegedly brave reporter. 'I’m a company guy. You want me to read a script, I’ll read it.'"

Ahhhh I see, Petahhh's a capitalist, eh?
I'm at a loss as to *how* I should deal with the whore who'll demand respect, after they've been paid for doing the *nasty*.
At first I wanna laugh aloud; but, I also feel a twinge of sympathy, too. {g}

Even so, I believe a pattern has been [well] established, here; concerning this particular Liberal-Socialist shill, his left wing media agenda, & to what [outrageous] extent(s) he'll go to see that agenda gets its time. (What devotion!)
A pattern The Mirror -- apparently -- *likes*.
(~how 'bout that Mirror, H1!! :o) )

Seriously, wouldn't y'all think it'd be the journalism community itself who'd wanna dump this freak the most?
The clown's an embarrassment whose brung only [more] shame, [more] suspicion, & [more] disrepute to an already deeply troubled "profession." {spit}

B.Bozell III, simply the best; glad he's on our side, the side of truth.

...thanks for the ping, Mr.M.

[VRWC_minion]

Support for the war is increasing, not decreasing

I believe he said that the protesting was increasing. That is a subjective judgement and not measurable, therefore its opinion.

[William McKinley]

He said opposition to the war was increasing, which was false when he said it, and is false still.