REPORTERS VS. PENTAGON

The arrogance, insensitivity and stupidity of news reporters never ceases to amaze and infuriate me. I am fed up with hearing journalists whine about “overly zealous government censorship” in the Gulf War zone, as Peter Arnett did again in his review of “Triumph Without Victory” (March 8).

As long as reporters put “the public’s right to know” above the safety of American troops; as long as they consider themselves journalists first and Americans second, if at all; they should be kept as far from the field and told as little as possible--especially if they have a political ax to grind (as many do, and did, and are).

In his last sentence, Arnett takes a final journalistic shot at the Pentagon for closing off the “necessary flow of news.” I doubt if he could find one soldier or home-front relative who would agree that instantaneous reports from the field of troop strength, equipment, tactics, disposition, movements, plans, capabilities or casualties was either “necessary” or wise. Yet those were precisely the areas to which the reporters’ questions repeatedly thrust at the time.

The Gulf War has made yet another contribution to the American lexicon: The term respected journalist as an oxymoron.

ARVID L. HOLMBERG

Lt. Cdr. USN (Retired)

MONROVIA