Let's discuss Bill O'Reilly

Missing factor:Foxnews, specially O'Rielly, is the world's most successful News medium - in record time. 99.9% of all he says, happens to be well founded and honest, as opposed trendy correct, and its antithesis based on a wish list of destruction and chaos if it was accepted and incurred.

Your example's veracity and context is unknown to me, but on the surface it appears Bill is wrong here. But this does not allign with anything else in your post.One who has power merits some authority - this is unavoidable. It must be compared with other entities with power, and if they are equivalent. Here, the example of Stalin fails.O'riely is not a traitor when it is compared with those who's resume against terrorism is blank - or worse. Foxnews succeeded because it clearly made a mockery of CNN, and more power to Bill.

I have a better one. How about the one which says 9/11 was an american and/or zionist plot? Here, Bill, not CNN, took up the issue. All Dems played the silent game. How cheap is that?

I think these pictures are used as a whip to hide from reality. While such actions are bad, it should not overshadow the real bad - and that is what the Libo's and Dems do - that is why they have *BLANK* resumes against the real baddies.Strangely, CNN never caused such interviews and deliberations of 1000s of hostages, crimes of Sadaam and some 700,000 Iraqi corpses unearthed by non-Dems. Here, a sub-plot is used to hide the main issue. The war on terror - not militants - is that-a-way from CNN.

quote:

---

IamJoseph, I noticed that you didn't address what some people have pointed out about O'reilly making the mistake several times and refusing to apologize.

---

I did so, pointing out in that instant he appears wrong. But I quickly returned to issue # 1.

quote:

---

You're not seriously trying to convince people at THIS site that Bill Orally was the only person to speak out against such a stupid accusation...are you?

---

Yes. Critical mass applies. Very little by CNN: loads of glorifying murderers. Depends what one sees as the primary factor.

The Libs 50 years ago and today are two different animals. The recent actions cannot be sideswept by such deflections. A blank resume against the war on terror today - a 100 stories about some poor actions in a prison.Better you examine what other countries did to their prisoners if you want to retreat 50 years, or what would be done today if caperbility was at hand. US has that caperbility but has shown great restraint. If you know history, 9/11 was a 100 times worse than 12/7 - and Bush showed unbelievable restraint. CNN has made every unbelievable excuse to whitewash real mass crimes and obsess over almost meaningless improvisations. In many countries, this broadcaster would be banned and be on trial.

quote:

---

So why was it everybody tuned to CNN when we invaded Iraq? Why was it everyone tuned to CNN to watch the towers fall.

---

We did not invade Iraq. The past 30 years not invading Iraq was the crime. You forgot to say the UN issued 17 Resos, the issue was WMD [and no - it was not a false alarm for invading if your looking for excuses - ala CNN!].That France and many European states hid under its bunkers again, due to the oil scandal, was a crime those countries also perpertrated with not going to Vietnam against Stalinist communism - which began in Europe's doorstep, not US: it was primarilly Europe's war and responsibility. CNN should highlight US contributions of democrasy and brave actions against tyranny - if this can be fitted between all the newstories of how bad she is.Your statement of ridicule US *INVADED* Iraq exposes only a one-eyed-jack distortion which is beyond ridiculous.

quote:

---

In the world of cable, CNN is the channel people turn to for news, not Fox.

---

CNN has great access in terror regime states, and 80% backed by oil $. And if you think this does not come with conditions attached, you are not fooling me. If you forgot which channel exposed 50 sleeper cells in US - you are not fooling anyone but yourself.None have given any posts here on issue # 1 - you can tell who watches CNN and who's resumes on it are BLANK.

quote:

---

And since nobody of any consequence ever claimed that the terrorist attacks were an American/Zionist plot

---

Lol. Where have you been hiding.

quote:

---

Torture was OKed by conservatives, not liberals.

---

I'd say, US would be the least involved in torture of any war/terror scenario today. But US is an open society and everything bops up, and is highlighted. Thus I say to those who accuse, show me your resume how you've equally rebelled about torture in other countries - even where war was not the event? Blank resumes shout loudest. i would say, despite those terrible pictorials in Iraq, US would have behaved very honorably all things considered.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you know history, 9/11 was a 100 times worse than 12/7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Says who? Surely you're not going to do something stupid and simply compare body counts, are you?

---

Ok, I won't give you body counts. How about a few degrees lower than a nuke attack in America's heartline, aimed at civilians only - as opposed the military base in PH? Still too stupid for you?

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and Bush showed unbelievable restraint.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? What are we doing in Iraq if Bush was showing restraint? Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.

---

BS! Hussain was engaged in a nuke program, dished out lottery sized rewards to suicide bombers, invaded Kuwait, possessed WMD, challenged 17 UN Reso's, murdered journalists w/o trials, genocided Kurds and 100s of 1000s of Iraqis on whims, boasted 100% voting success for 25 years, and was an Al Qaiada in process. The crime is that all this occured under the noses of the EU, UN and the Arab states. But you are looking for a particular colored needle in a haystack with polka dots on it.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In many countries, this broadcaster would be banned and be on trial.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Indeed. If O'Reilly were to be broadcasting in the UK, he'd be in jail on slander charges so fast it would make his head spin. Fortunately for him, we have the First Amendment, no matter how much he, like the conservative movement in general, hates the Constitution.

---

The reverse is the facts. In US, legal actions have become rampant, while UK media is a shambles - the term militants was only replaced with terrorists when London was bombed - even then, reluctantly.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The past 30 years not invading Iraq was the crime.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? We were the ones who installed Hussein in Iraq.

---

I know of this infamous nonesense, its been flogged by all the desperates. Fact is, US backed parties in the M/E & Afghanistan against encroaching communism, same as with S. Korea & Vietnam. It has no connection with the terrorism and regime attrocities which emerged when the cold war was over. Your score thus far is two blatant, selective distortions, and my guess is it surely won't end here.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You forgot to say the UN issued 17 Resos, the issue was WMD
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

You forgot that the inspectors had complete access to everything, any time they wanted, including surprise inspections and were reporting back that there was nothing to find.

​

All intelligence out of Iraq said there were no WMDs, no program to create them.

---

No and No. In the pivotal stages, the inspectors left in disgust; their conclusions were non-conclusive. US acted after the last 3 Reso's fully acknowledged and incorporated its actions. Show me your resume how far did Sadaam go before attacking Kuwait - was there much deliberation at the UN? Score is #3.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That France and many European states hid under its bunkers again
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? You mean behaving like adults and not invading a country unprovoked, especially a country that was battered and beaten, couldn't mount a defense, and was of absolutely no threat is "hiding"?

​

Is that the only way you can justify yourself? Kicking puppies?

---

Why is US not attacking other *PUPPIES*? The EU states had no such forebearence about not attacking, except they were steeped to their eye balls in corruption with Sadaam. And Sadaam being a puppy is only a retrospective brilliance. And unprovoked? Maybe there is no terrorism anywhere - its all a fiction - you gotta catch the bunny only after the fat lady sings - if your still alive?

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
due to the oil scandal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? You mean the oil-for-food scandal that the United States was participating in?

---

Yes. And you made remarkable use of the term 'participating' here.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a crime those countries also perpertrated with not going to Vietnam against Stalinist communism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Huh? So when Vietnam kicked out France, it was because France was engaged in a "crime" but when Vietname kicked out the US, it was because we were...what, exactly?

---

France & Europe had every obligation to confront communism - which began in its backyard; US had far less. This war had nothing to do with oil - the desperation placebo; no excuse for Europe to hide in this instant. # 4.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it was primarilly Europe's war and responsibility.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

Then what, precisely, were we doing in Southeast Asia? If it wasn't our war and wasn't our responsibility, why did we send so many Soldiers to die in vain?

​

Oh, yes...it was a Democrat who got us involved. So choose your words carefully...you just said that it was a crime not to go into Vietnam. So that must mean that JFK's and Johnson's entry into Vietname were the noble things to do and Nixon's withdrawal that was the crime.

​

When you figure out what your argument is, please let us know.

---

That issue was not about domestic parties, but about not seeing the world become communist. Democrasy's protection incurs a cost factor. No oil in this case, remember? # 5.

quote:

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your statement of ridicule US *INVADED* Iraq
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

What was it if not an invasion? Iraq posed no threat and had not attacked. It is our troops in their country having found themselves there at the end of guns, overthrowing their government and taking over.

​

How is that not "invasion"? If it had happened in reverse, which you seem to think is an imminent threat, if it had been Hussein that had launched attacks on the US unprovoked, sent troops onto our soil, captured our President, and sent him to his death, what would you call it?

---

No invasion, as with Sadaam upon Kuwait, or as in Burma. In fact, hardly, if US is manouvering its exit at this time. #6.

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you forgot which channel exposed 50 sleeper cells in US
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

(*chuckle*)

​

You really believe that, don't you?

​

By the way, the latest study of how informed people are by the source of their news just came out.

​

Fox News is no longer in last place. They're ahead of "Network morning shows" and behind "Local TV News."

​

Number 1?

​

The Daily Show/Colbert Report.

---

Yes, # 1 in cable news. CNN is a western Al Jazeera. And yes - chuckle about sleeper cells - they lead to mass murders in Bali, Madrid, London, Israel, India, Thailand - not counting the near misses by the 1000's. Chuckle that in your blank resume.

quote:

---

Exactly who other than the tinfoil hat brigade was saying the terrorist attacks were a government/zionist plot?

---

There is reality - and there is reality of denial. Some 300 books of your favourite subject in denial are best sellers across Europe and the islamic world; billions of europeans and muslims hold it as a fact 9/11 was a US/Zionist fix.This stuff is rampant and one of the 100s of sci-fi dished out as historical, sacred truths - including that there was no Jewish temple in Jerusalem, Moses and JC were muslim Palestinians, the long admitted falsehoods of blood libels and the Protocols taught in schools as history, etc, etc, etc. You hold on to your reality and I'll pass.

Europe condones those funny falsehoods by, you said it, its silence. Now i ask you - the Protocols and blood libels are pervasive in islamist states - even TV serials are made of them - also broadcast in Europe. Now lets says Europe calls it freedom of speech. But I ask you - when Europe long ago, but after a very long time [many centuries of allowing them to stand], acknowledged these were horrific fakes which took the lives of 100s of 1000s of innocent people: should Europe be silent of it - seeing that these emerged from its own backyards? What about freedom of speech to denounce falsehoods? What about the truth will set you free? What about the VE VERE NOT AVARE syndrome? Think it over honestly, and tell me what and who condones, fosters and legitimises global terror by silence. Think about it if an arguement can be made that Europe caused 9/11 - now that's an idea for a best seller!I see you are also confused about sadaam dishing out lottery sized rewards to suicide bombers. Wow!

quote:

---

How did this emerge from europes backyard? As far as i know, the USA's foreign policy is the cause of the 9/11 attacks. As reverend Wright said; "The chickens are coming home to roost".

​

If you think thats foolish, you should read up on your history.

---

Blood libels and the protocols are made in Europe - thus there is an onus it cleanses its mess. The Pope and the danes missed out on a great op to site these racist slogans in Arabia - when it was whiplashed for meagre cartoon satire - but I guess it did not occur to them.USA policy has been too lopsided out of a forebearence - thus the war on terror grows - with much fstering from the EU. The chicks are coming home to roost - mostly in Eurostan. Don't worry - the US of A will again save you - then Europe can again blame America.

quote:

---

tyranny in the US

---

For example, and compared to...?