Peter Arnett The Gulf War When did he cover the gulf war? Arnett brought continuous coverage from Baghdad for the 16 initial intense hours of the war (17 January 1991
what are highlites of his coverage there?
What are highlights of Peter Arnett's coverage in Baghdad from 1991?
Arnett worked for CNN for 18 years ending in 1999. During the Gulf War, he became a household name worldwide when he became the only reporter with live coverage directly from Baghdad. His dramatic reports often had air raid sirens blaring and the sound of US bombs exploding in the background. Together with two other CNN journalists, Bernard Shaw and John Holliman, Arnett brought continuous coverage from Baghdad for the 16 initial intense hours of the war (17 January 1991). Although 40 foreign journalists were present at the Al-Rashid Hotel in Baghdad at the time, only CNN possessed the means -- a private phone line connected to neighboring Amman, Jordan -- to communicate to the outside world. CNN broadcast Arnett's extended call live for several hours, with a picture of Arnett as video. Soon the other journalists left Iraq, including the two CNN colleagues, which left Arnett as the sole remaining reporter.  His accounts of civilian damage caused by the bombing were not well received by the coalition war administration, who by their constant use of terms like "smart bombs" and "surgical precision" in their public statements, had tried to project an image that civilian casualties would be at a minimum. White House sources would later state that Arnett was being used as a tool for Iraqi disinformation, and CNN received a letter from 34 members of the United States Congress accusing Arnett of "unpatriotic journalism".  Two weeks into the war, Arnett was able to obtain an exclusive, uncensored interview with Saddam Hussein. The Gulf War became the first war to be seen truly live on TV, due to Arnett's reporting from the "other side", for a period of five weeks.  About halfway through the war the CIA approached Mr. Arnett. They believed that the Iraqi military was operating a high-level communication network from the basement of the Al Rashid Hotel, which is where Mr. Arnett and a few others from CNN were staying. The CIA wanted him out so the Air Force could bomb the hotel, but Mr. Arnett refused. He said he had been given a tour of the hotel and denied there was such a facility. CANNOTANSWER
Arnett was able to obtain an exclusive, uncensored interview with Saddam Hussein.
Peter Gregg Arnett  (born 13 November 1934) is a New Zealand-born American journalist. He is known for his coverage of the Vietnam War and the Gulf War. He was awarded the 1966 Pulitzer Prize in International Reporting for his work in Vietnam from 1962 to 1965, mostly reporting for the Associated Press.

Arnett also worked for National Geographic magazine, and later for various television networks, most notably for nearly two decades at CNN.  Arnett published a memoir, Live from the Battlefield: From Vietnam to Baghdad, 35 Years in the World's War Zones (1994). In March 1997, Arnett interviewed Osama bin Laden, leader of Al-Qaeda. The journalism school at the Southern Institute of Technology in New Zealand was named for Arnett.

Early life
Arnett was born in 1934 in Riverton, in New Zealand's Southland region. His first job as a journalist was with The Southland Times.

Vietnam
During his early years in journalism, Arnett worked in Southeast Asia, largely based in Bangkok. In 1960 he started publishing a small English-language newspaper in Laos. Eventually, he made his way to Vietnam, which the French had abandoned after being defeated at Dien Bien Phu by communists from North Vietnam.

Arnett became a reporter for the Associated Press, based in Saigon in the South, in the years when the United States began to get involved in the civil conflict and through the Vietnam War. On 7 July 1963, in what became known as the Double Seven Day scuffle, he was injured in a widely reported physical altercation between a group of western journalists and South Vietnamese undercover police. The reporters were trying to cover Buddhist protests against the South Vietnamese government. His articles, such as "Death of Supply Column 21," about an event during Operation Starlite in August 1965, resulted in raising the ire of the American government, which had been increasing the number of forces in the region.

Arnett accompanied troops on dozens of missions, including the battle of Hill 875, in November 1967. An American detachment was sent to rescue another unit that was stranded in hostile territory, and the rescuers were nearly killed during the operation. In September 1972, Arnett joined a group of U.S. peace activists, including William Sloane Coffin and David Dellinger, on a trip to Hanoi, North Vietnam, to accept three American prisoners of war for return to the United States.

Arnett wrote in an unvarnished manner when reporting stories of ordinary soldiers and civilians. Arnett's writing was often criticized by administration spokesmen as negative, who wanted to keep reporting of the war positive. General William Westmoreland, President Lyndon B. Johnson and others in power put pressure on the AP to get rid of or transfer Arnett from the region.

In what is considered one of his iconic dispatches, published on 7 February 1968, Arnett wrote about the Battle of Bến Tre: "'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it,' a United States major said today. He was talking about the decision by allied commanders to bomb and shell the town regardless of civilian casualties, to rout the Vietcong." The quotation was gradually altered in subsequent publications, eventually becoming the more familiar, "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." The accuracy of the original quotation and its source have often been called into question.  Arnett never revealed his source, except to say that it was one of four officers he interviewed that day. US Army Major Phil Cannella, the senior officer present at Bến Tre, suggested that the quotation might have been a distortion of something he said to Arnett. The New Republic at the time attributed the quotation to US Air Force Major Chester L. Brown. In Walter Cronkite's 1971 book, Eye on the World, Arnett reasserted that the quotation was something "one American major said to me in a moment of revelation."

Arnett was one of the last western reporters remaining in Saigon after its fall and capture by the People's Army of Vietnam. Occupying soldiers showed him how they had entered the city.

Arnett wrote the 26-part mini-series documentary, Vietnam: The Ten Thousand Day War (1980), produced by Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC).

Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
At the time of the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, Arnett was working for Parade magazine. With a contact named Healy, he entered Afghanistan illegally from Pakistan; both men were dressed in traditional clothing as natives and led by Mujahideen guides. They continued to a Jalalabad hideaway of approximately fifty rebels. The trip came to an end when Healy fell into the Kunar River, ruining the pair's cameras. Later, Arnett would recount the story to journalist Artyom Borovik, who was covering the Soviet side of the war.

Gulf War
Beginning in 1981, Arnett worked for CNN for 18 years, ending in 1999. During the Gulf War, he became a household name worldwide as the only reporter to have live coverage directly from Baghdad, especially during the first 16 hours. His dramatic reports often were accompanied by the sound of air raid sirens blaring and US bombs exploding in the background. Together with two other CNN journalists, Bernard Shaw and John Holliman, Arnett brought continuous coverage from Baghdad for the 16 initial intense hours of the war (17 January 1991). Although 40 foreign journalists were present at the Al-Rashid Hotel in Baghdad at the time, only CNN possessed the means — a private phone line connected to neighboring Amman, Jordan — to communicate to the outside world. CNN broadcast Arnett's extended call live for several hours, with a picture of Arnett as video. Soon the other journalists left Iraq, including the two CNN colleagues, which left Arnett as the sole remaining reporter.

His accounts of civilian damage caused by the bombing were not well received by the coalition war administration. Its spokesmen had emphasized terms such as "smart bombs" and "surgical precision" in their public statements, in an effort to project keeping civilian casualties would be at a minimum. White House sources would later attack Arnett, saying that he was being used as a tool for Iraqi disinformation.

Two weeks into the war, Arnett was able to obtain an exclusive, uncensored interview with Saddam Hussein. Due to Arnett's reporting from the "other side", for a period of five weeks, the Gulf War was the first to be broadcast live on TV.

About halfway through the war, representatives of the CIA approached Arnett. They believed that the Iraqi military was operating a high-level communication network from the basement of the Al Rashid Hotel, which is where Arnett and other staff from CNN were staying. The CIA wanted him out so the Air Force could bomb the hotel, but Arnett refused. He said he had been given a tour of the hotel and denied there was such a facility.

Interview with Osama Bin Laden
In March 1997, Arnett of CNN interviewed Osama bin Laden, leader of Al-Qaeda, after Bin Laden declared jihad on the United States. Asked by Arnett, "What are your future plans?", Bin Laden said, "You'll see them and hear about them in the media, God willing".

Operation Tailwind
In 1998, Arnett narrated a report on the joint venture (between CNN and Time magazine) program called NewsStand, covering "Operation Tailwind" in Laos in 1970.

The report, titled The Valley of Death, claimed that in 1970, the United States Army had used sarin, a nerve gas, against a group of deserting U.S. soldiers in Laos. The men who allegedly conducted the attack were an elite Green Beret A-Team.  The report was expressly approved by both CNN Chairman Tom Johnson and CNN President Rick Kaplan. In response, the Pentagon commissioned another report contradicting that of CNN's. CNN subsequently conducted its own investigation. It concluded that the "journalism [in the Valley of Death] was flawed" and retracted the story. While all 12 men of the Green Beret A-Team were wounded in action during Operation Tailwind, no sarin was involved.

Due to a number of rebuttals claiming the CNN report was flawed, three or more of the individuals responsible were fired or forced to resign. Arnett was reprimanded, and left the network in April 1999, apparently due to "lingering fallout" from Tailwind.

Invasion of Iraq 2003
On assignment for NBC and National Geographic, Arnett went to Iraq in 2003 to cover the U.S. invasion. After a press meeting there, he granted an interview to state-run Iraqi TV on 31 March 2003. In it he said:

Earlier in the interview he said:

When Arnett's remarks sparked a "firestorm of protest", NBC initially defended him, saying he had given the interview as a professional courtesy and that his remarks were "analytical in nature". A day later, though, NBC, MSNBC and National Geographic all severed their relationships with Arnett. In response to Arnett's statement on Iraqi TV, NBC stated:

Arnett responded:

Later that day, Arnett was hired by the British tabloid, The Daily Mirror, which had opposed the war. A couple of days later he also received work from Greek television channel NET television, and Belgian VTM.

Academic career

After retiring as a field reporter in 2007, Arnett lives in Los Angeles.

He also teaches journalism at Shantou University in China. In New Zealand, the Peter Arnett School of Journalism was named for him at the Southern Institute of Technology; the journalism school closed in 2015.

Personal life
In 1964, Arnett married Nina Nguyen, a Vietnamese woman. They had two children, Elsa and Andrew. Nina and Peter separated in 1983, divorced more than 20 years later, then reconciled in 2006.

Elsa Arnett attended Stuyvesant High School in New York and Harvard University. After graduating, she went into journalism, became a reporter, worked for several months on The Washington Post as an intern and then joined The Boston Globe. She worked with her father on his 1994 memoir about his reporting life. Elsa Arnett is married to former White House lawyer John Yoo.

In the 2007 New Year Honours, Arnett was appointed an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit, for services to journalism.

In popular culture
Peter Arnett appeared in Robert Wiener's book Live from Baghdad. He appeared as a character in the 2002 HBO film of the same name, where he was portrayed by actor Bruce McGill.

The book, as well as the film, features Arnett's work as part of Wiener's crew in Baghdad. Arnett joined the team as tensions between Iraq and the West were escalating toward an imminent military encounter. CNN sent Arnett to Baghdad because of his experience in covering military conflicts. Arnett was part of the live coverage beginning on 16 January 1991, the start of the Gulf War air campaign, where he and colleagues Bernard Shaw and John Holliman kept broadcasting from their Al-Rasheed Hotel room amid extensive aerial bombing by the Western Coalition forces.

Arnett's interview with Bin Laden in 1997 became the subject of the movie 'A War Story' produced for television. Peter's role was played by John Leigh.

Selected works

 Live from the Battlefield: From Vietnam to Baghdad: 35 Years in the World's War Zones. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994. 
 Saigon Has Fallen: A Wartime Recollection by the Pulitzer Prize-Winning Journalist. New York: Rosetta Books/Associated Press, 2015

See also
 CNN controversies
 List of New Zealand television personalities

References

Bibliography

External links

 
 Sully, François, "Associated Press' Peter Arnett testing the first flame thrower captured from the Vietcong in Vietnam", photograph; 8 December 1965. Copyright Healey Library, UMass Boston; via openvault.wgbh.org.
 

American television reporters and correspondents
American war correspondents
American war correspondents of the Vietnam War
War correspondents of the Vietnam War
1934 births
Living people
CNN people
People from Riverton, New Zealand
Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting winners
New Zealand television presenters
New Zealand emigrants to the United States
Officers of the New Zealand Order of Merit
People with acquired American citizenship
Ngāi Tahu
20th-century American journalists
American male journalists
In computer science, test coverage is a measure (in percent) of the degree to which the source code of a program is executed when a particular test suite is run. A program with high test coverage has more of its source code executed during testing, which suggests it has a lower chance of containing undetected software bugs compared to a program with low test coverage. Many different metrics can be used to calculate test coverage. Some of the most basic are the percentage of program subroutines and the percentage of program statements called during execution of the test suite.

Test coverage was among the first methods invented for systematic software testing. The first published reference was by Miller and Maloney in Communications of the ACM, in 1963.

Coverage criteria 
To measure what percentage of code has been executed by a test suite, one or more coverage criteria are used. These are usually defined as rules or requirements, which a test suite must satisfy.

Basic coverage criteria 
There are a number of coverage criteria, but the main ones are:
 Function coveragehas each function (or subroutine) in the program been called?
 Statement coveragehas each statement in the program been executed?
 Edge coveragehas every edge in the control-flow graph been executed?
 Branch coveragehas each branch (also called the DD-path) of each control structure (such as in if and case statements) been executed? For example, given an if statement, have both the true and false branches been executed? (This is a subset of edge coverage.)
 Condition coveragehas each Boolean sub-expression evaluated both to true and false? (Also called predicate coverage.)

For example, consider the following C function:
int foo (int x, int y)
{
    int z = 0;
    if ((x > 0) && (y > 0))
    {
        z = x;
    }
    return z;
}

Assume this function is a part of some bigger program and this program was run with some test suite. 
 Function coverage will be satisfied if, during this execution, the function foo was called at least once.
 Statement coverage for this function will be satisfied if it was called for example as foo(1,1), because in this case, every line in the function would be executed—including z = x;.
 Branch coverage will be satisfied by tests calling foo(1,1) and foo(0,1) because, in the first case, both if conditions are met and z = x; is executed, while in the second case, the first condition, (x>0), is not satisfied, which prevents the execution of z = x;.  
 Condition coverage will be satisfied with tests that call foo(1,0) and foo(0,1). These are necessary because in the first cases, (x>0) evaluates to true, while in the second, it evaluates to false. At the same time, the first case makes (y>0) false, while the second makes it true.

Condition coverage does not necessarily imply branch coverage. For example, consider the following code fragment:
if a and b then
Condition coverage can be satisfied by two tests:
 a=true, b=false
 a=false, b=true
However, this set of tests does not satisfy branch coverage since neither case will meet the if condition.

Fault injection may be necessary to ensure that all conditions and branches of exception-handling code have adequate coverage during testing.

Modified condition/decision coverage 

A combination of function coverage and branch coverage is sometimes also called decision coverage. This criterion requires that every point of entry and exit in the program has been invoked at least once, and every decision in the program has taken on all possible outcomes at least once. In this context, the decision is a boolean expression comprising conditions and zero or more boolean operators. This definition is not the same as branch coverage, however, the term decision coverage is sometimes used as a synonym for it.

Condition/decision coverage requires that both decision and condition coverage be satisfied. However, for safety-critical applications (such as avionics software) it is often required that modified condition/decision coverage (MC/DC) be satisfied. This criterion extends condition/decision criteria with requirements that each condition should affect the decision outcome independently.

For example, consider the following code:
if (a or b) and c then
The condition/decision criteria will be satisfied by the following set of tests:
 a=true, b=true, c=true
 a=false, b=false, c=false
However, the above tests set will not satisfy modified condition/decision coverage, since in the first test, the value of 'b' and in the second test the value of 'c' would not influence the output. So, the following test set is needed to satisfy MC/DC:
 a=false,  b=true,  c=false
 a=false, b=true,  c=true
 a=false, b=false, c=true
 a=true,  b=false, c=true

Multiple condition coverage 
This criterion requires that all combinations of conditions inside each decision are tested. For example, the code fragment from the previous section will require eight tests:
 a=false, b=false, c=false
 a=false, b=false, c=true
 a=false, b=true, c=false
 a=false, b=true, c=true
 a=true, b=false, c=false
 a=true, b=false, c=true
 a=true, b=true, c=false
 a=true, b=true, c=true

Parameter value coverage 
Parameter value coverage (PVC) requires that in a method taking parameters, all the common values for such parameters be considered. The idea is that all common possible values for a parameter are tested. For example, common values for a string are: 1) null, 2) empty, 3) whitespace (space, tabs, newline), 4) valid string, 5) invalid string, 6) single-byte string, 7) double-byte string. It may also be appropriate to use very long strings. Failure to test each possible parameter value may result in a bug. Testing only one of these could result in 100% code coverage as each line is covered, but as only one of seven options are tested, there is only 14.2% PVC.

Other coverage criteria 
There are further coverage criteria, which are used less often:
 Linear Code Sequence and Jump (LCSAJ) coverage a.k.a. JJ-Path coverage has every LCSAJ/JJ-path been executed?
 Path coverageHas every possible route through a given part of the code been executed?
 Entry/exit coverageHas every possible call and return of the function been executed?
 Loop coverageHas every possible loop been executed zero times, once, and more than once?
 State coverageHas each state in a finite-state machine been reached and explored?
 Data-flow coverageHas each variable definition and its usage been reached and explored?

Safety-critical or dependable applications are often required to demonstrate 100% of some form of test coverage.
For example, the ECSS-E-ST-40C standard demands 100% statement and decision coverage for two out of four different criticality levels; for the other ones, target coverage values are up to negotiation between supplier and customer.
However, setting specific target values - and, in particular, 100% - has been criticized by practitioners for various reasons (cf.)
Martin Fowler writes: "I would be suspicious of anything like 100% - it would smell of someone writing tests to make the coverage numbers happy, but not thinking about what they are doing".

Some of the coverage criteria above are connected. For instance, path coverage implies decision, statement and entry/exit coverage. Decision coverage implies statement coverage, because every statement is part of a branch.

Full path coverage, of the type described above, is usually impractical or impossible. Any module with a succession of  decisions in it can have up to  paths within it; loop constructs can result in an infinite number of paths.  Many paths may also be infeasible, in that there is no input to the program under test that can cause that particular path to be executed.  However, a general-purpose algorithm for identifying infeasible paths has been proven to be impossible (such an algorithm could be used to solve the halting problem). Basis path testing is for instance a method of achieving complete branch coverage without achieving complete path coverage.

Methods for practical path coverage testing instead attempt to identify classes of code paths that differ only in the number of loop executions, and to achieve "basis path" coverage the tester must cover all the path classes.

In practice
The target software is built with special options or libraries and run under a controlled environment, to map every executed function to the function points in the source code. This allows testing parts of the target software that are rarely or never accessed under normal conditions, and helps reassure that the most important conditions (function points) have been tested.  The resulting output is then analyzed to see what areas of code have not been exercised and the tests are updated to include these areas as necessary. Combined with other test coverage methods, the aim is to develop a rigorous, yet manageable, set of regression tests.

In implementing test coverage policies within a software development environment, one must consider the following:

  What are coverage requirements for the end product certification and if so what level of test coverage is required?  The typical level of rigor progression is as follows: Statement, Branch/Decision, Modified Condition/Decision Coverage (MC/DC), LCSAJ (Linear Code Sequence and Jump)
  Will coverage be measured against tests that verify requirements levied on the system under test (DO-178B)?
  Is the object code generated directly traceable to source code statements?  Certain certifications, (i.e. DO-178B Level A) require coverage at the assembly level if this is not the case: "Then, additional verification should be performed on the object code to establish the correctness of such generated code sequences" (DO-178B) para-6.4.4.2.

Software authors can look at test coverage results to devise additional tests and input or configuration sets to increase the coverage over vital functions. Two common forms of test coverage are statement (or line) coverage and branch (or edge) coverage. Line coverage reports on the execution footprint of testing in terms of which lines of code were executed to complete the test. Edge coverage reports which branches or code decision points were executed to complete the test. They both report a coverage metric, measured as a percentage. The meaning of this depends on what form(s) of coverage have been used, as 67% branch coverage is more comprehensive than 67% statement coverage.

Generally, test coverage tools incur computation and logging in addition to the actual program thereby slowing down the application, so typically this analysis is not done in production.  As one might expect, there are classes of software that cannot be feasibly subjected to these coverage tests, though a degree of coverage mapping can be approximated through analysis rather than direct testing.

There are also some sorts of defects which are affected by such tools. In particular, some race conditions or similar real time sensitive operations can be masked when run under test environments; though conversely, some of these defects may become easier to find as a result of the additional overhead of the testing code.

Most professional software developers use C1 and C2 coverage. C1 stands for statement coverage and C2 for branch or condition coverage. With a combination of C1 and C2, it is possible to cover most statements in a code base. Statement coverage would also cover function coverage with entry and exit, loop, path, state flow, control flow and data flow coverage. With these methods, it is possible to achieve nearly 100% code coverage in most software projects.

Usage in industry
Test coverage is one consideration in the safety certification of avionics equipment. The guidelines by which avionics gear is certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is documented in DO-178B and DO-178C.

Test coverage is also a requirement in part 6 of the automotive safety standard ISO 26262 Road Vehicles - Functional Safety.

See also

 Cyclomatic complexity
 Intelligent verification
 Linear Code Sequence and Jump
 Modified Condition/Decision Coverage
 Mutation testing
 Regression testing
 Software metric
 Static code analysis
 White box testing
 Java code coverage tools

References

Software metrics
Software testing tools Claude R. "Shug" McGaughey III  (born January 6, 1951) is an American Hall of Fame thoroughbred horse trainer.

McGaughey began working as a trainer in 1979 and  to date has won more than 240 graded stakes races. In 1986, he got his big break when Ogden Phipps hired him to train his stable of horses. In 1988, McGaughey won the Eclipse Award for Outstanding Trainer in the United States. Among his many wins, he has captured the Jockey Club Gold Cup three times, the Travers Stakes four times, and won the 1989 Belmont Stakes with Hall of Fame Champion Easy Goer as well as the 2013 Kentucky Derby with Orb. McGaughey's nine Breeders' Cup victories ranks second to D. Wayne Lukas. Among the other horses he has trained are back-to-back Breeders' Cup Mile winner Lure and Hall of Famer Personal Ensign.  McGaughey has accomplished the rare trifecta of training a Breeders' Cup winner, her daughter, and her granddaughter in the troika of Personal Ensign, My Flag and Storm Flag Flying.  In 2013 he won his first Kentucky Derby with Orb.

In 2004, McGaughey was inducted into the National Museum of Racing and Hall of Fame. At his induction ceremony, he said: "My deepest debt of gratitude always has been and always will be to the Phipps family" and "My affiliation with the Phipps family is one of the great highlights of my life. I wouldn't be here without them."

References
 Shug McGaughey at the NTRA
 Biography and racing highlites for Claude R. McGaughey III at Keeneland
 

American horse trainers
United States Thoroughbred Racing Hall of Fame inductees
Eclipse Award winners
1951 births
Living people
Horse trainers from Lexington, Kentucky