To say I have been annoyed, frustrated and p.o.-ed at the reprehensible, lousy, insulting piece of journalistic excrement that CNN broadcast on June 7 is a grossly inadequate means of expressing my revulsion. I often note that "... some people don't want to be confused with facts which contradict their preconceived opinions." Politicians and bureaucrats do it all the time. Single issue activists do it routinely. For bigots and ideologists it is axiomatic. However, when alleged journalists present such a blatant disinformation piece of whole cloth propaganda, it is a sadness. Peter Arnett and April Oliver are contemptible excuses for human beings ... a real waste of skin. Arnett proved himself an anti-American, prejudiced purveyor of lies in Vietnam. He willingly gave aid and comfort to Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War. His reports from Baghdad about the alleged U.S. destruction of civilian targets were absurd, myopic and dishonest. He knew that "poor fleeing woman" was an official of Iraq's propaganda machine. He knew the signs on the buildings were bogus (in fact they were written in English for U.S. consumption, Italian for Italy, French for France, etc.). Arnett has survived a career of disseminating the gospel according to Peter (Arnett), and has assiduously stepped around the truth and facts which "contradict his preconceived opinion." It is significant that NONE of the main points of "CNN NewsStand" can hold water. Still CNN struggles to defend the indefensible. CNN contends deadly Sarin nerve gas was used in Operation Tailwind. NOT! CNN contends an objective of the operation was to kill American defectors. NOT! Both Admiral Thomas Moorer, who was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, and Lt. Col. Eugene McCarley, who was a captain and commander of the Tailwind operation deny telling CNN one of the objectives was to kill American defectors. Moorer says he never told CNN Sarin was used. By the way, IF Sarin had been used, the US troops would have been US fatalities. Even the discredited and maligned alleged source of the story, Robert Van Buskirk, disputed key points of what he allegedly told CNN. It is almost poetic that the Clinton News Network (CNN) would be dealt a mortal blow by this dirtbag fiction writer Arnett. CNN's military adviser, Maj. Gen. Perry Smith, when belatedly alerted to the content of the Arnett/Oliver story tried to unplug it. He went all the way to the top, the president of CNN, to plead for a retraction. He failed ... kinda. He subsequently resigned in disgust in the hope his resignation would aid the cause of truth. Give the general an "attaboy"/with oak leaf cluster. Reportedly, when the CNN suits told Smith to shut up or they'd sue, he welcomed the opportunity to see them in court. Hoorah! While we are acknowledging the good with the bad, Tom Marzullo, John Plaster, David Hackworth, and Joseph Farah should also get "attaboys" for courageously rebutting CNN's bucket of bullfeathers. Last week I was scheduled to interview Major John Plaster. His op-ed piece in The New York Times was a visceral joy to read in the wake of CNN's perfidy. Plaster was a SOG (Special Operations Group) operative and on the ground when the "Tailwind" raiders returned (he also wrote an outstanding book last year, "SOG"). He had to cancel our interview at the last minute because Secretary of Defense William Cohen requested a briefing. I hope to get him on the air soon. Col. David Hackworth (author/warrior/hero/WorldNetDaily columnist) did join me last week to discuss the essence of this piece. I want to publicly apologize to the colonel. He offered to challenge Arnett to a duel, and jumped his stuff and told him to stand in line ... I wanted dibs. Hackworth outranks me, he is older and wiser, and has a monumentally more distinguished career than me. I respectfully defer to the better man ... but still want to be his second. "Hack" and I both noted something which is conspicuous by its absence. Where is the righteous indignation of the mainstream media to CNN's obvious abuse of journalistic power? Where is ABC, NBC, CBS, et al? The New York Times (to their credit) published Plaster's refutation of the CNN/Time piece. Where is the rest of the mainstream? Here is a classic competitive opportunity to exploit a fatal weakness of the competition. Here is an opportunity to defend the integrity of the industry by disavowing shoddy work. Here is a chance to reclaim that territorial imperative once owned by the big three. The silence is deafening. Honorable, courageous men who have epitomized Duty, Honor, Country have been trashed by a dirtbag with an agenda. A dirtbag not worthy to scrape the mud and blood from the boots of the men he has vilified. Time magazine is apparently trying to distance itself from the schlock work of their co-conspirators. A CNN flak, Howard Polskin says "It's not surprising that there is some controversy over the facts, given the nature of the story." Hey, Howie baby, the facts are not in dispute -- the fiction of Arnett/Oliver/CNN is. What next? We have investigations up the wazoo: CNN is investigating; Time magazine is investigating; and the Department of Defense is investigating. Will CNN throw Arnett and Oliver on their swords to protect Teddy's Toyland? Will Time magazine shift the blame to the wacky kids at CNN and disown their validation of the lies? Will Bill Cohen's Department of Defense expose the offal of a huge Clinton supporter who has pledged one billion dollars to the United Nothing? Film at eleven ... maybe.