Replies

The question MSNBC and G.E. should be made to answer is; was it wrong for a journalist to tell the information ministry of Iraq that his reports are increasing the anti war pressure in America? It's not simply a matter of harm done to the American and Allied effort, but did MSNBC consider the fact that such a statement would raise false hopes in the Iraqi leadership that continued "fierce resistance" would lead to their survival. This in turn leading to the futile deaths of thousands of Iraqi military and civilians who need not die. I do not believe this broadcast was live, thus MSNBC had time to consider its impact beyond ratings.Anti war and anti Bush sentiments may have induced management to play the tape, but common sense should have told them that while America is not going to be swayed by Peter Arnett, Iraq might be, and the false hope that America is awash in anti war fever would lead to further conflict and many more dead. DESPICABLE!!!!

Anti war and anti Bush sentiments may have induced management to play the tape,

MAY have?!?! :-) Everybody knows Arnett's a proven liar, as has been pointed out in the thread already.

but common sense should have told them that while America is not going to be swayed by Peter Arnett

Oh, man, now you totally lost me. You're accusing liberals of having common sense. :-)

You're right, of course. But it also sews discord in this country.

I saw short segments of Arnett's "interview" on Fox last night. I was struck with Arnett's tentative, "deer-in-the-headlights" look and demeanor. I got the impression that he was mouthing the Iraqis' script. Perhaps they were threatening to throw him out if he didn't toe the line. Maybe he was not being sinister, but just selling out. Either way--DISPICABLE!