Try Arnett for treason, senator says ? i really dont get it

[brad]

http://enquirer.com/editions/2003/04...bunning02.html

----------------
WASHINGTON - Correspondent Peter Arnett should be "tried as a traitor" for remarks he made in an interview with Iraqi state television, Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., said Tuesday.

Arnett, a New Zealand native and naturalized U.S. citizen, said in the Sunday interview that Washington's "first war plan has just failed because of Iraqi resistance. ... Clearly, the American war planners misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces."
--------------------

i really dont get it. somebody explain it. during vietnam were people calling for trying people like jane fonda as a traitor? (btw she called gi's criminals and said she applauded n.v. killing them and she helped them so i think shes like million times worse.)

the reason i dont get it is that arnett basically just repeated what the administration said (before war started , administration said, hey, iraqis are waiting to be liberated, once we start shooting, theyll fall all over themselves to surrender. remember that? ). how can arnett be a traitor for repeating what US policymakers said?

on a related note, anyone who saw it, did arnett say something like , you know, the US limited war isnt working, it looks like they may use (criminal?) mass bombing now. if he did i would think that would scare the crap out of the iraqis.

having said that, i think if he basically cheered the iraqis and said hey, be brave, take heart, you can win this, keep fighting, youve got the US on the run, etc., then i can see where a case for treason can be made, but to be honest i dont see where that happened, if anyone does see it please respond.