Peter Arnett--Commander, Iraqi Medina Media Division

[Jedi Knight]

The most agenda-driven reporter of the war (or either that the Iraqis have a gun to his head as he speaks), Peter Arnett is giving the most clueless newby information on TV that I have ever seen as far as military operations go.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20030327/i/1048729650.2416312360.jpg

He just reported that the US was going to lose the war (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54889-2003Mar30.html), while reporting for Iraqi state-television!

They better get Pete out of there. He might be suiffering from terminal leftism and Saddamitis (the fear of the destruction of the Iraqi regime).

JK

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight
The most agenda-driven reporter of the war (or either that the Iraqis have a gun to his head as he speaks), Peter Arnett is giving the most clueless newby information on TV that I have ever seen as far as military operations go.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20030327/i/1048729650.2416312360.jpg

He just reported that the US was going to lose the war (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54889-2003Mar30.html), while reporting for Iraqi state-television!

They better get Pete out of there. He might be suiffering from terminal leftism and Saddamitis (the fear of the destruction of the Iraqi regime).

JK

did you even read the article? he said the strategy for the first part of the war has failed. if you read around a bit, rumsfeld was the person responsible for this plan, which seemed to assume that the Iraqi army would just roll over like last time, and the Shiites would revolt. They aren't and it hasn't.

Time for the generals to actually get in charge and run the war.

As for him giving an interview to Iraq, he is a journalist doing his job. You are quite free to disagree or agree.

[Ben Shniper]

Agreed... This leftist should be pulled out of there...

And put into America's court system for the disused sedition laws to get back into common knowledge.

We should not pretend that we are "powerful" and "good" enough to be able to ignore such crimes.

-Ben

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


did you even read the article? he said the strategy for the first part of the war has failed. if you read around a bit, rumsfeld was the person responsible for this plan,

If you had been reading the news today, you would know that Rumsfield claimed, as before, that General Franks is the author of the plan, and that Franks owned up to it as well. Good or bad, the plan is General Franks'.

-Ben

[a_unique_person]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/apr1999/cnn-a22.shtml

what happens when you use the right of free speech against the pentagon. you get sacked and intimidated.

[EvilYeti]

Good lord, do you really think the "World Socialist Web Site" is a good source of accurate and unbiased information?

Arnett wasn't fired, he quit CNN after they agreed to terminate his contract early. He had been taking flak, quite rightfully I might add, by veteran groups for his role in the Tailwind debacle.

He made the decision to take part in what amounted to slander against veterans and the Pentagon, whom had every right to be furious with him. You would think it would have learned his lesson by now.

It's obvious he has a bone to pick with the Pentagon, the military and CNN, so anything that comes out of his mouth is guaranteed to be biased. He ceased being a journalist years ago and is now nothing more than an a bitter old man with a chip on his shoulder.

There is also circumstantial evidence that he is being bribed by the Iraqi government, which would also explain his position and "exclusive" access in Baghdad.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/apr1999/cnn-a22.shtml

what happens when you use the right of free speech against the pentagon. you get sacked and intimidated.

[Wolverine]

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Neal Boortz (http://www.boortz.com) for my new sig. :D

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Ben Shniper


If you had been reading the news today, you would know that Rumsfield claimed, as before, that General Franks is the author of the plan, and that Franks owned up to it as well. Good or bad, the plan is General Franks'.

-Ben

yes, and i have also read reports in the news before today that rumsfeld was. reports today that franks was are just playing catch up.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Neal Boortz (http://www.boortz.com) for my new sig. :D

and are you going to use the link kindly provided by boortz to

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/adoptatroop.php

adopt a military member, as part of the presidential prayer team, and pray for them every day. You get to print out an official certificate to certify that fact.

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/images/AOT_cert_example.gif

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Neal Boortz (http://www.boortz.com) for my new sig. :D

he's got more guts than you.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by EvilYeti
Good lord, do you really think the "World Socialist Web Site" is a good source of accurate and unbiased information?



that was the first link that came up, and if you dispute the facts, please do so.



Arnett wasn't fired, he quit CNN after they agreed to terminate his contract early. He had been taking flak, quite rightfully I might add, by veteran groups for his role in the Tailwind debacle.



did he jump or was he pushed. a position can be made untenable.



He made the decision to take part in what amounted to slander against veterans and the Pentagon, whom had every right to be furious with him. You would think it would have learned his lesson by now.



what was the slanderous part?



It's obvious he has a bone to pick with the Pentagon, the military and CNN, so anything that comes out of his mouth is guaranteed to be biased. He ceased being a journalist years ago and is now nothing more than an a bitter old man with a chip on his shoulder.



the Pentagon has a lot of skeletons in it's closet. Did they actually rebut the story, or attack the messenger. After what they did to him, I'd have a chip on my shoulder too. He has put his life on the line to get news stories.



There is also circumstantial evidence that he is being bribed by the Iraqi government, which would also explain his position and "exclusive" access in Baghdad.



which evidence?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Ben Shniper
Agreed... This leftist should be pulled out of there...

And put into America's court system for the disused sedition laws to get back into common knowledge.

We should not pretend that we are "powerful" and "good" enough to be able to ignore such crimes.

-Ben

no one that has attacked him in this thread, has actualy bothered to even say, what he has done wrong.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


and are you going to use the link kindly provided by boortz to

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/adoptatroop.php

adopt a military member, as part of the presidential prayer team, and pray for them every day. You get to print out an official certificate to certify that fact.

:rolleyes: No.

I found the quote hilarious, that's all.

***Edited to remove the inadvertent, unnecessary re-posting of the image displayed above.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
he's got more guts than you.

I'll just add this to the ever-growing list of overly generalized, ludicrously assumptive statements you consistently make without having any way of corroborating.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


I'll just add this to the ever-growing list of overly generalized, ludicrously assumptive statements you consistently make without having any way of corroborating.

he has reported from within a war zone, unarmed, putting his life at risk the whole time. CNN was quite happy to get all they could from him for Gulf War I. He was in a country with a government that at any time could have decided he was not telling it the way they liked, and made him disappear, with no one being able to prove what happened.

and no-one has still said, what he did wrong.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


he has reported from within a war zone, unarmed, putting his life at risk the whole time. CNN was quite happy to get all they could from him for Gulf War I. He was in a country with a government that at any time could have decided he was not telling it the way they liked, and made him disappear, with no one being able to prove what happened.

and no-one has still said, what he did wrong.

Time out.

Either demonstrate conclusively why Peter Arnett has "more guts" than myself -- or retract your statement.
If you insist on posting baseless assumptions, I'll thank you to keep me out of them.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


Time out.

Either demonstrate conclusively why Peter Arnett has "more guts" than myself -- or retract your statement.
If you insist on posting baseless assumptions, I'll thank you to keep me out of them.

i am working on the quite good gamble that you have never worked as a war correspondent.

I am also assuming that to compare him to Jane Fonda is being a totally overgeneralised put down. Here he is being accused of crimes that are not specified, of having a bad hair do, of emulating Jane Fonda, when he is the guy that goes out there and risks his life, and his career. And what are the attacks on him here? Nothing that I can see that makes any sense.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
i am working on the quite good gamble that you have never worked as a war correspondent.

No, you're working from complete ignorance about who I am or what I've ever done. Are you now unwilling to admit that you have no possible way of substantiating the claim you made?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


No, you're working from complete ignorance about who I am or what I've ever done. Are you now unwilling to admit that you have no possible way of substantiating the claim you made?

OK, I'll make a deal, You withdraw the ignorant statement that he is Jane Fonda with a bad comb over, and I'll withdraw the statement about you. I still bet you have never worked as a war correspondent.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


OK, I'll make a deal, You withdraw the ignorant statement that he is Jane Fonda with a bad comb over, and I'll withdraw the statement about you. I still bet you have never worked as a war correspondent.

No.

I did not author the statement you find to be ignorant; I'm quoting its creator, and find it amusing.

You claimed that Peter Arnett "has more guts" than I -- something you cannot possibly have any way of knowing.
Either substantiate your claim or withdraw it.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


No.

I did not author the statement you find to be ignorant; I'm quoting its creator, and find it amusing.

You claimed that Peter Arnett "has more guts" than I -- something you cannot possibly have any way of knowing.
Either substantiate your claim or withdraw it.

the only reason I raised it is because you find that he is a 'jane fonda', and i know what that means. that he is a traitor. He is the guy who goes in, and risks his life, as part of his job. he has no backup like tanks or aircraft to call on. it was only in response to that jibe that I raised my own about you, that is, it was an accusation that was used to point out the inadequacies of your own position. And I still bet you haven't worked as a war correspondent.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
the only reason I raised it is because you find that he is a 'jane fonda', and i know what that means.

I've never made any such statement. You'll note in my posts that I found the Boortz quote to be funny, but have not offered anywhere my view or opinion on Peter Arnett. There is a marked difference.

He is the guy who goes in, and risks his life, as part of his job. he has no backup like tanks or aircraft to call on. it was only in response to that jibe that I raised my own about you, that is, it was an accusation that was used to point out the inadequacies of your own position. And I still bet you haven't worked as a war correspondent.

You're choosing to ignore the fact that there's no way you can verify your statements which involve myself.

Last time I'll ask: prove it or withdraw your statement.

[Supercharts]

Here's a pic of Ms. Fonda
http://www.snopes.com/

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


the only reason I raised it is because you find that he is a 'jane fonda', and i know what that means. that he is a traitor. He is the guy who goes in, and risks his life, as part of his job. he has no backup like tanks or aircraft to call on. it was only in response to that jibe that I raised my own about you, that is, it was an accusation that was used to point out the inadequacies of your own position. And I still bet you haven't worked as a war correspondent.

Arnett propagandized against his own people to appease the terror Iraqi regime.

You defend him? lol. Sad, so sad.

JK

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


i am working on the quite good gamble that you have never worked as a war correspondent.

I am also assuming that to compare him to Jane Fonda is being a totally overgeneralised put down. Here he is being accused of crimes that are not specified, of having a bad hair do, of emulating Jane Fonda, when he is the guy that goes out there and risks his life, and his career. And what are the attacks on him here? Nothing that I can see that makes any sense.


AUP,

Just curious...but could you please tell us all what you think of Jane Fonda and her foray into Vietnaw during that war?

-z

[Supercharts]

"Hedgerow Hell: Allies Stall in Fields of Normandy"
"Cherbourg Out of Reach --Eisenhower rushing reinforcements. Did Ike underestimate the Nazis?"
"Caen: Montgomery's First Day Objective Still Under Nazi Control"
"Only Rumors of Rockets--No 'Secret Weapons' in Early Fighting"
"St. Loo in Ruins--Hundreds of French Civilians Dead As Historic Village Leveled"
"No Signs of Jewish Revolt in Warsaw--Paris Does Not Rise Up on News of Invasion."
"Germans in Berlin rally to their Fuhrer."

http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/467opczk.asp

[schplurg]

To get back on topic...
Arnett has been fired from NBC.
sacked (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=496&u=/ap/20030331/ap_on_en_tv/war_arnett_10&printer=1)
He has also been fired from National Geographic
sacked again (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0331_030331_arnettfired.html)

Supposedly Geraldo was kicked out of Iraq, but he's denying it, so ...no link yet.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by schplurg
To get back on topic...
Arnett has been fired from NBC.
sacked (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=496&u=/ap/20030331/ap_on_en_tv/war_arnett_10&printer=1)
He has also been fired from National Geographic
sacked again (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/03/0331_030331_arnettfired.html)

Supposedly Geraldo was kicked out of Iraq, but he's denying it, so ...no link yet.

Sometimes media personnel get confused about what their job is. Their job is not to debate US policy from a personal point of view to entire enemy nation-state populations.

The other recent incident of something like this happening was when Ashley Banfield from MSNBC went into the West Bank and was reporting on the Israeli action there. One day she pops on TV wearing Yasser Arafat's Fatwah colors around her neck. Needless to say they yanked her out of there after that happened.

Arnett, with his experience, should have known better. He should have known better. I am guessing that he had an axe to grind with the pentagon and it was just the wrong thing to do. You never give the enemy comfort when your peers are fighting for their lives in a war zone. Worse still is that Arnett was wrong. The US is on the verge of total victory.

JK

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


Sometimes media personnel get confused about what their job is. Their job is not to debate US policy from a personal point of view to entire enemy nation-state populations.

The other recent incident of something like this happening was when Ashley Banfield from MSNBC went into the West Bank and was reporting on the Israeli action there. One day she pops on TV wearing Yasser Arafat's Fatwah colors around her neck. Needless to say they yanked her out of there after that happened.

Arnett, with his experience, should have known better. He should have known better. I am guessing that he had an axe to grind with the pentagon and it was just the wrong thing to do. You never give the enemy comfort when your peers are fighting for their lives in a war zone. Worse still is that Arnett was wrong. The US is on the verge of total victory.

JK

pure military victory is not the same as a victory for the US as a nation. You can win a war, and come out smelling like a compost heap. Arnett is not the only one pointing out that the US is getting a bit on the nose right now. Many others are agreeing with him. Sorry to ruin your day, JK, but that is the truth. A large assumption on the part of the US was that the Iraqis would rise again in rebellion. Well, it appears they don't trust the US any more than they trust Saddam, now.

The actual military victory is still going to happen, as far as everyone knows, from what I can tell. That is not the issue. The analysis of the US of the situation is the issue. And they still have not provided a clear aim of the war, what will be done when the war is over. Why fight a war, when you do not even know what it is meant to achieve.

Indonesia, after the Bali bombings, had only a few, scattered protests when the extremist muslim leader behind the bombings was arrested. They knew it was a fair cop. Now that this war is in progress, there are large demonstrations against the war, and Australia is getting a fair part of the anger directed towards it.

[saddam]

Peter is okay in my book. A month ago, he brought me some Havanas that were top rate.

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by saddam
Peter is okay in my book. A month ago, he brought me some Havanas that were top rate.

They must be good -- I understand from Pentagon sources that you are still smoking.

NA

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by rikzilla



AUP,

Just curious...but could you please tell us all what you think of Jane Fonda and her foray into Vietnaw during that war?

-z

she was naive. because she knew the US was feeding her a lot of lies about the war, then the vietnamese were only telling the truth. both sides were lying to her. but then, she was just an actress interested in politics. the hate shown towards her is incredible. the US dug it's own grave in vietnam, and refuses to face up to that fact. instead, the current fashion appears to be to blame everyone else.

[saddam]

Originally posted by NoZed Avenger
They must be good -- I understand from Pentagon sources that you are still smoking.

My doctor was telling me, "Saddam, don't smoke! It's bad for you!"

We, his advice was not so good for him!

Now I have Tariq's doctor. He says, "Smoke as much as you like, your Excellency!"

But the ventillation in my bunker, not so good. :mad:

And this little "bush" is giving me a headache.

[Advocate]

I used to have respect for Peter Arnett, but this recent episode as a mouthpeice for Iraqi propaganda has changed my mind about him. Maybe it is just an old grudge against the Pentagon, or maybe something else. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that NBC made a business decision to fire him. IMHO this was because the American people would not put up with a journalist making these kinds of statements and NBC rightly determined that they would lose viewers over it. I doubt Arnett will ever work in the US again. Now if only we could convince the viewing audiences to do the same thing regarding some actors who have put their feet in their mouths concerning this war...

[Supercharts]

Originally posted by Advocate
I doubt Arnett will ever work in the US again. Now if only we could convince the viewing audiences to do the same thing regarding some actors who have put their feet in their mouths concerning this war...

"LONDON - A British tabloid newspaper said Tuesday it had hired veteran reporter Peter Arnett, who was fired by American TV network NBC after he said the U.S.-led war effort in Iraq (news - web sites) had failed.

"Fired by America for telling the truth," said the Daily Mirror in a front page headline, adding it had hired the "legendary war reporter" to carry on telling the truth.

"I am still in shock and awe at being fired," Arnett wrote for the newspaper, which is vehemently opposed to the war. "I report the truth of what is happening here in Baghdad and will not apologize for it."

NBC fired Arnett, who won a Pulitzer Prize reporting in Vietnam for The Associated Press, on March 31, angered that he had given an unauthorized interview with state-run Iraqi TV saying the American-led war effort initially failed because of Iraq's resistance.

The network said it got thousands of e-mails and phone calls protesting his remarks. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=514&e=9&cid=514&u=/ap/20030401/ap_on_en_tv/britain_arnett

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Advocate
I used to have respect for Peter Arnett, but this recent episode as a mouthpeice for Iraqi propaganda has changed my mind about him. Maybe it is just an old grudge against the Pentagon, or maybe something else. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that NBC made a business decision to fire him. IMHO this was because the American people would not put up with a journalist making these kinds of statements and NBC rightly determined that they would lose viewers over it. I doubt Arnett will ever work in the US again. Now if only we could convince the viewing audiences to do the same thing regarding some actors who have put their feet in their mouths concerning this war...

have you read what was done to him and the team of reporters on that story?

Have you read about the story. This is very interesting reading.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.findings/index.html

The Pentagon will not tolerate investigation of it's seamier aspects.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The Pentagon will not tolerate investigation of it's seamier aspects.

Perhaps you're unaware that then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen ordered an investigation (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/21/pentagon.tailwind.02/) into the matter after the story aired initially, which yielded no evidence to substantiate the claims made in the Valley of Death program. Additionally, the Conclusion portion of the very URL you referenced (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.findings/index.html) corroborates the governmental investigation's findings. Perhaps you should re-read that section.

Speaking of substantiating claims, scroll up a bit. You still have work to do.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by rikzilla



AUP,

Just curious...but could you please tell us all what you think of Jane Fonda and her foray into Vietnaw during that war?

-z

I liked her better in Barbarella.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


Perhaps you're unaware that then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen ordered an investigation (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/21/pentagon.tailwind.02/) into the matter after the story aired initially, which yielded no evidence to substantiate the claims made in the Valley of Death program. Additionally, the Conclusion portion of the very URL you referenced (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.findings/index.html) corroborates the governmental investigation's findings. Perhaps you should re-read that section.

Speaking of substantiating claims, scroll up a bit. You still have work to do.

Despite all the evidence presented, they then invoke a legalese patch up of a job that involved interviews with over 200 people. If all the facts presented were not correct or in dispute, the main part of the story still stands, or at least raises questions. The US military has been involved in numerous covert operations, many of them of highly dubious morality.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Despite all the evidence presented, they then invoke a legalese patch up of a job that involved interviews with over 200 people. If all the facts presented were not correct or in dispute, the main part of the story still stands, or at least raises questions.

No. Despite all evidence to the contrary, in your desire to demonize the United States in any manner possible, you refuse to acknowledge credible source material which contradicts your view. That does not constitute behavior indicative of skepticism.

I am still awaiting your corroboration/retraction of the statement you made concerning me earlier on this thread. Your evasion has been noted -- but based upon principle, I will not allow the issue to slide.

[saddam]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The US military has been involved in numerous covert operations, many of them of highly dubious morality.

Don't worry. I will punish the sick dogs for you.

[Agammamon]

Originally posted by Ben Shniper


If you had been reading the news today, you would know that Rumsfield claimed, as before, that General Franks is the author of the plan, and that Franks owned up to it as well. Good or bad, the plan is General Franks'.

-Ben

Frank's created this plan from faulty info/intell. We've done several warfighting exersizes recently to play out the course of this war. In the exersizes the red commander finally quit in disgust, why? Because he was winning but he wasn't supposed to. Some of his tactics were forbidden, the results of others ignored. The exersizes were scripted for a blue win. And let's not forget intell estimates that border on hallucinations.

[Wolverine]

^^^^

Source, please.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Wolverine


Perhaps you're unaware that then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen ordered an investigation (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/21/pentagon.tailwind.02/) into the matter after the story aired initially, which yielded no evidence to substantiate the claims made in the Valley of Death program. Additionally, the Conclusion portion of the very URL you referenced (http://www.cnn.com/US/9807/02/tailwind.findings/index.html) corroborates the governmental investigation's findings. Perhaps you should re-read that section.

Speaking of substantiating claims, scroll up a bit. You still have work to do.

OK, I cannot discern if Peter Arnett is more of a man than you, Wolverine. using facts available to me. I would, guess, however, with what I believe would be a high chance of correctness, that he has put himself in more dangerous situations than you have, for the elucidation of us all on matters of war. For this I believe he does deserve a level of respect that puts him above being a mere actor who was deluded by another war to state things that may or may not have been correct.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


OK, I cannot discern if Peter Arnett is more of a man than you, Wolverine. using facts available to me.

Thank you.

[zakur]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
and are you going to use the link kindly provided by boortz to

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/adoptatroop.php

adopt a military member, as part of the presidential prayer team, and pray for them every day. You get to print out an official certificate to certify that fact.How 'bout that creepy decal from the site?

http://www.presidentialprayerteam.org/itemimages/84.jpg

[Renfield]

Originally posted by Wolverine


I've never made any such statement. You'll note in my posts that I found the Boortz quote to be funny, but have not offered anywhere my view or opinion on Peter Arnett. There is a marked difference.



You're choosing to ignore the fact that there's no way you can verify your statements which involve myself.

Last time I'll ask: prove it or withdraw your statement.

Your posting that quote and stating your approval of it does imply that you agree with it, even if you didn't personally say the words "Peter Arnett is the british Jane Fonda" or whatever.

So there.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by Renfield


Your posting that quote and stating your approval of it does imply that you agree with it, even if you didn't personally say the words "Peter Arnett is the british Jane Fonda" or whatever.

So there.

Excuse me, would you be so kind as to point out precisely where I stated any approval of the quotation in question?

Looking at the attatched materials in posters' signatures, some place comments in that space with which they agree or to reflect their personal ideology, while others highlight utterances they abhor in effort to make an example of or draw attention to them.

As you scroll back and review my posts, you'll find that I've made no such endorsement, nor have I made any derogatory comments toward Peter Arnett or Jane Fonda. As a matter of fact, you'll note that I haven't expressed any view pertaining to the Arnett issue on this forum.

As previously stated, I find the quotation humorous.

Without further information upon which to base your conclusion, all you have presented reflects solely an assumption.

[Denise]

I agree with Wolverine.

[Wolverine]

*bows/worships* :)

[Renfield]

Originally posted by Wolverine


Excuse me, would you be so kind as to point out precisely where I stated any approval of the quotation in question?



You didn't say so explicitly, but implied it. That was my point.

[Supercharts]

The opinion of Arnett that the coalition war-plan had failed is currently being offset by the coalitions discovery of a secret tunnel under the airport landing strip that goes all the way to a Presidential Palace.

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by Renfield


You didn't say so explicitly, but implied it. That was my point.

Then why did you post, verbatim, that I had "stated my approval?" There is a difference.