 |
|
“I came to Baghdad with my crew because the Iraqi side needs to be heard too,” Arnett
|
LONDON,
April 1 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) – Insisting he will
never stop reporting on the truth of the Iraq invasion, sacked U.S. TV
correspondent, Peter Arnett, Tuesday, April 1, said he was still in
shock and awe at being fired and there was enormous sensitivity within
the U.S. government to reports coming out from Baghdad.
“They
don't want credible news organizations reporting from here because it
presents them with enormous problems,” Arnett was quoted as saying by
British Daily Mirror.
“I
reported on the original bombing for NBC and we were half a mile away
from those massive explosions. Now I am really shocked that I am no
longer reporting this story for the U.S. and awed by the fact that it
actually happened.
“That
overnight my successful NBC reporting career was turned to ashes. And
why? Because I stated the obvious to Iraqi television; that the U.S. war
timetable has fallen by the wayside.
“I
have made those comments to television stations around the world and now
I'm making them again in the Daily Mirror.
“I'm
not angry. I'm not crying. But I'm also awed by this media
phenomenon,” he added.
Under
the headline; “Home Of The Free”, the Daily Mirror said that
“Pulitzer Prize winner Arnett is joining the Daily Mirror”, adding
that “Arnett joined the Mirror on the day it was revealed that 8,700
bombs have rained down on Iraq in 12 days, including 3,000 missiles over
the weekend”.
“The
right-wing media and politicians are looking for any opportunity to be
critical of the reporters who are here, whatever their nationality. I
made the misjudgment which gave them the opportunity to do so,” Arnett
said, in an exclusive interview to his new media destination.
“I
gave an impromptu interview to Iraqi television feeling that after four
months of interviewing hundreds of them it was only professional
courtesy to give them a few comments.
“I
have not yet decided what to do, whether to pack my bags and leave
Baghdad or stay on. I'll decide what to do today, right now I'm chewing
on what has happened to me,” he added.
That
was my Waterloo - bang!
“But
whatever happens I will never stop reporting on the truth of this war
whether I am in Baghdad or somewhere else in the Middle East - or
even back in Washington.
“I
was here in 1991 and the bombing is very similar to that conflict but
the reality is very different. The U.S. and British want to come here,
take over the city, upturn the government and take us through to a new
era. The troops are in the country and fighting there way up here. It
creates a very different atmosphere,” he charged.
“The
Ba'ath party, currently led by Saddam Hussein, has been in power for 34
years. Tariq Aziz told me the U.S. will have to brainwash 25 million
Iraqis because these people think exactly the same as Saddam does.
“Maybe
he is wrong, maybe not. For months, Iraqis have said officially and
privately: "We will fight the Americans, we will use guerrilla
tactics, we will surprise them."
“But
the Iraqi opposition has said: "This will be a pushover, everyone
wants to rebel against Saddam."
“Now
the reality is being played out on the battlefield,” Arnett went on.
“We
have to watch the reality now and some Iraqis are fighting and the
government does seem very determined. For me to see that and to be
criticized for saying the obvious is unfair.
“But
it has made me a target for my critics in the States who accuse me of
giving aid and comfort to
the enemy. I don't want to give aid and comfort to the enemy - I
just want to be able to tell the truth.
“I
came to Baghdad with my crew because the Iraqi side needs to be heard
too. It is clear the original timetable that America would be in Baghdad
by the end of March has fallen by the wayside.
“There
is clearly debate in the U.S. about this, reinforcements are being sent
in and there are delays. This doesn't mean it is going badly. Every
casualty is a loss but they have been in limited numbers so far.
“Every
night and every day I hear the B-52s and the missiles hammering the
defenses of Baghdad. Just like in Afghanistan and Vietnam, the U.S. is
bringing enormous firepower to bear which it believes will grind the
Iraqis down. I have seen it before and it has been enormously effective.
The US optimism is justified.
Civilians
Pay The Price
“On
the other hand, at what cost to civilians ? During the Tet Offensive in
Vietnam, I entered a U.S.-held town which had been totally destroyed.
“The
Viet Cong had taken over and were threatening the commander's building
so he called down an artillery strike which killed many of his own men.
“The
Major with u.s. asked: "How could this happen?" A soldier
replied: "Sir, we had to destroy the town to save it."
“The
Bush and Blair administration does not want that label stuck on this
war, it is a liberation for them. But the problem is U.S. Marines at
checkpoints are suspicious of every man, woman and child because of the
suicide bomb.
“Already
there is suspicion growing. And in the south, there have not been
popular rebellions and uprisings. As the battle for Baghdad grows, the
potential for civilian casualties grows.
“This
is the specter rising as this war continues. The US and Britain have to
figure this out. I don't think you can tell how it will end, there are
many scenarios. A siege of Baghdad... a special operations strike on
Saddam. Optimists in the Pentagon talk about an internal coup.
“Who
would have had believed Umm Qasr would hold out for six days or US
Marines directing traffic would be killed by a suicide bomber? This is
more like the West Bank and Gaza and it could become like that in some
areas.
“The
U.S. and Britain must avoid that scenario. Forces come in, communities
resist, then suicide bombing and resistance from guerrillas. Except the
Iraqis will be putting up a stiffer fight than the Palestinians because
they are better armed.
“We
know the world, including many Americans, is ambivalent about this war
and I think it is essential to be here. I'm not here to be a superstar.
I have been there in 1991 and could never be bigger than that.
“Some
reporters make judgments but that is not my style. I present both sides
and report what I see with my own eyes. I don't blame NBC for their
decision because they came under great commercial pressure from the
outside.
“And
I certainly don't believe the White House was responsible for my
sacking. But I want to tell the story as best as I can, which makes it
so disappointing to be fired,” Arnett concluded.