O'Reilly Video: Possibly the most Fascist statement yet

Video: "Judges & Lawyers who want torture disclosure are Terror Allies"

It's paraphrased above, but this piece of excriment was lecturing John McCain on the effectiveness of different degree of torture!!!
While I've lost my respect for McCain, he's championing a cause he knows first hand about, and I can never perceive as diminished....his service & courage.

Perma LINK:

www.crooksandliars.com...


(Click Video)

[edit on 8-8-2005 by Bout Time]

[edit on 8-8-2005 by Bout Time]

[edit on 8-8-2005 by RANT]

Ah you two fixed it when I wasn't looking



ORilly would puts me in mind of Howard Stern at times, he just opens his mouth for the shock value,

[edit on 8/8/2005 by Sauron]

I caught that on the daily show. NUTS! The guy may have his niche, but to say something like that to McCain is to just be absolutely out of your mind. McCain wouldn't call him on it, though, but that boy needs to have some sense slapped into him, twice.

BT, can you fix the video link? It no work.

I can't believe you watch Bill. When he's right, he's right for the wrong reason. His logic is based on nothing more than his own opinion.

Originally posted by jsobecky
BT, can you fix the video link? It no work.

Here ya go.

Edit: hmm, didn't work either... I guess you'd better use BT's second link and go from there...

[edit on 9-8-2005 by Durden]

I can't believe that anyone cites Comedy Central as a credible news source. O'Reilly's point was that coerced interrogation works. McCain's point was that torture does not.

I won't fault McCain myself because. while I was never tortured by the enemy, the treatment of my wounds was torturous and I know first-hand that you cannot know what you would do under certain circumstances until you are in those circumstances.

It should be evident to even the likes of Bout Time that Jon Stewart is not so concerned with delivering the news as he is with delivering a laugh and good ratings. Clearly, a sure-fire way to get a laugh is to tell jokes about certain politicians to people who didn't vote for those politicians and are bitter as hell about it.

The truth is that John McCain's conduct while a POW is not universally hailed as heroic and John McCain is the first to admit it. Consider the following assessment by David H. Hackworth:

McCain's Silver Star narrative for the period 27 October 1967 -- the day after he was shot down -- to 8 December 1968 reads: "His captors… subjected him to extreme mental and physical cruelties in an attempt to obtain military information and false confessions for propaganda purposes. Through his resistance to those brutalities, he contributed significantly towards the eventual abandonment…" of such harsh treatment by the North Vietnamese.

Yet in McCain's own words just four days after being captured, he admits he violated the U.S. Code of Conduct by telling his captors "O.K, I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital."

A Vietnam vet detractor says, "He received the nation's third highest award, the Silver Star, for treason. He provided aid and comfort to the enemy!"

source

In fact, Stewart's "humor" is not nearly as "cerebral" as he and his viewers like to think. It's actually completely "visceral," like laughing at a guy slipping on a banana peel or getting kicked in the testicles.

I think it's 'bout time that Bout Time stopped clogging PTS forums with such myopic and useless drivel.


[edit on 2005/8/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Bout Time, as usual, I totally agree with you.

McCain lost me quite awhile back, though I have talked him up of late (alongside SC Senator Lindsey Graham). They're taking the right side of the fight on this torture business.

Of all people, Bill O'Reilly doesn't know his dyk from a stick in the ground re: torture, or warfare, or military.. or anything close to it. And no one knows it better than McCain.. so there you go.

O'Reilly is ridiculous. And that's being extremely nice.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
It should be evident to even the likes of Bout Time that Jon Stewart is not so concerned with delivering the news as he is with delivering a laugh and good ratings. Clearly, a sure-fire way to get a laugh is to tell jokes about certain politicians to people who didn't vote for those politicians and are bitter as hell about it.

It's like Rush Limbaugh always said (through the Clinton years), the reason a joke's funny is because its grounded in truth.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I can't believe that anyone cites Comedy Central as a credible news source.

Context is highly important. It's been shown, first off, that Daily Show viewers are far more educated than O'Reilly viewers. However, Jon Stewart, while biased, is up front about his bias. He also, because he is aiming for laughs, is willing to bash either side, and does so frequently. In circumstances like this, he's dead on.

The point wasn't the Daily Show. The point was O'Reilly's comments to McCain, well performed fake news show or not.

Conduct aside, McCain is not one to be lectured to regarding torture. How he behaved immediately is not of concern.

It's actually completely "visceral," like laughing at a guy slipping on a banana peel or getting kicked in the testicles.

Aside from being only half the picture (it's popular because it's intelligent) there's nothing wrong with visceral comedy.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid


It's like Rush Limbaugh always said (through the Clinton years), the reason a joke's funny is because its grounded in truth.

Yeah, but no one with any credibilty cites Limbaugh as a journalist. Limbaugh and Stewart are cut from the same cloth, yet there are those who guffaw at one and wince at the other.

One point should be made in defense of O'Reilly. I'm no fan of journalists, in general, and think they get way too much praise and money for doing far less in war than what Privates and PFCs do for small change and trinkets, but the fact is that O'Reilly has served as a war correspondent, has seen combat, and surely knows what it feels like to be "in it." as Chris Matthews, who has never been "in it," always likes to ask veterans.

[edit on 2005/8/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Context is highly important. It's been shown, first off, that Daily Show viewers are far more educated than O'Reilly viewers.

I dare say Amory, with all due respect, that the average O'Reilly viewer has as much education as you.

However, Jon Stewart, while biased, is up front about his bias. He also, because he is aiming for laughs, is willing to bash either side, and does so frequently. In circumstances like this, he's dead on.

You can say virtually the same for O'Reilly. O'Reilly has his biases and opines every night. He does, however, give voice to both sides and will nail a conservative as vigorously as a liberal. I watch his show frequently and can vouch for both his strengths and his weaknesses.

Conduct aside, McCain is not one to be lectured to regarding torture. How he behaved immediately is not of concern.

Firstly, O'Reilly did not lecture McCain about torture. In fact, he didn't argue the case for torture, at all. What he did was to differentiate between what is known as "coerced interrogation" and torture, a point that McCain did not dispute. I saw that segment in its entirety.

Secondly, McCain's conduct "immediately" is very much a matter of concern, especially to McCain. To say otherwise, completely ignores and trivializes the Code of Conduct.

Aside from being only half the picture (it's popular because it's intelligent) there's nothing wrong with visceral comedy.

Jon Stewart is a funny man, but the intelligence of his humor is debatable. Perhaps, I would agree with you if he didn't conveniently ignore the whole picture to garner laughs. The man's a comedian, not a journalist.


[edit on 2005/8/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Yeah, but no one with any credibilty cites Limbaugh as a journalist.

Now that's a new one on me. I've listened to Limbaugh since the early '90's and I assure you all, his disciples are true believers and he IS their political Jesus. (Well.. unless you're under Dobson's spell.)

As far as Stewart goes.. he says upfront this is the fake news. It's on the COMEDY CHANNEL. But you know what, his flipped psy version of events is more true than anything else you're gonna get on the networks or cable.. you know why? It's CLOAKED in comedy, therefore, hands are off. You wanna get a real take on events, truly I say, you'll "get it" watching The Daily Show.

And trust me, I know how sad that sounds. I am a member of the much-maligned mainstream media. It's great though. Its funny as hell b/c its insanely true. That's how Limbaugh was before he sold out (around '96). He hasn't been worth an *expletive* since before the election that year.

One point should be made in defense of O'Reilly. I'm no fan of journalists, in general, and think they get way too much praise and money for doing far less in war than what Privates and PFCs do for small change and trinkets, but the fact is that O'Reilly has served as a war correspondent, has seen combat

What's that? O'Reilly has "war" experience? I'd like to see links. And let me remind you, just b/c you fly into country and hang out in some safe zone, does not make one combat experienced.

I write for a large regionaly daily and have appeared in many newspapers and websites across the country. I assure you, I do not make a mint. You have no idea the pay cut I took to do what I'm doing now. Some of us actually do love what we do more than money.

I think I have an idea of what combat experience means and, as you might have noticed, I'm not all that fond of heaping praise on journalists. My point is that O'Reilly has seen enough of combat to know what it is and to know viscerally what the experience is like for those who fight.

He was promoted to the network as a CBS News correspondent and covered the wars in the Falkland Islands and El Salvador from his base in Buenos Aires, Argentina(1982).

en.wikipedia.org...

In 1980, he anchored his own program on WCBS-TV in New York and received an Emmy Award during his tenure there. Later he became a CBS News correspondent covering the wars in El Salvador and the Falkland Islands, among other assignments.

www.foxnews.com...

Bigger markets beckoned. But in Dallas, then Denver, same thing, except the stakes were higher: Brash reporter popular with viewers, loathed by management. Awards and suspensions. Success and failure - at the same time. An anchoring gig in Hartford. Four television stations in five years. Then he hit New York in 1980, working for the CBS affiliate. An Emmy for investigative reporting. A year later, a promotion to network correspondent under newly installed anchor Dan Rather.

O'REILLY WAS ON FIRE. HE WAS DISPATCHED TO EL SALVADOR AND THEN ARGENTINA. AFTER RISKING HIS LIFE TRYING TO COVER THE FALKLAND ISLANDS WAR, HE HAD THE GALL TO COMPLAIN WHEN A SENIOR CORRESPONDENT SWIPED HIS FOOTAGE AND STORY. THE PROCESS IS CALLED "BIG FOOTING," AND IT'S AS MUCH A PART OF THE NETWORK CULTURE AS HAIR SPRAY. HE WOULDN'T GO ALONG. THE FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED. LIKE THE POLITICAL PRISONERS OF ARGENTINA, AT CBS O'REILLY HAD BEEN "DISAPPEARED." [sic]

source

[edit on 2005/8/10 by GradyPhilpott]

The Falkland war? Come on, be serious.

That's why I never heard of O'Reilly's experience.

Look, I'm not dissing you Grady, but that ain't shiZit.

Grady, I used to watch O'Reilly every night, until I couldn't bear it anymore. The moment he opens his flap about foreign policy..he loses all credibility. He knows absolutely NOTHING about it. He, like Thomas Crowne said, I think ain't nuthin but personal opinion. And he's so misguided its beyond ridiculous.

The closest to war he's ever come is trying to get a classroom in order down in Florida. That's the God's honest truth.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
The Falkland war? Come on, be serious.

That's why I never heard of O'Reilly's experience.

Firefights are like floods. If you're in it, it's a big one. This is not a p*ssing contest. My only point is that the man was a war correspondent and covered combat. Comparing war experiences is not my game, but there's one thing all combat vets know. No matter how big a war story you've got, someone's always got a bigger one.


[edit on 2005/8/10 by GradyPhilpott]

Countdown with Keith Olberman had him as the worst person in the world a few days ago, comparing him to Hanoi Jane, some remark he made was in line with with jane fonda said back during vietnam.
couldn't find a link to support what I said.

I think it had to do with gitmo?

Daily SHow does have smarter people watching, more college graduates, more PHD holders, so forth. Wasn't it the(damn it name was in my head go to type it and it leaves, like NEILSON or something?) that did the study and found Billy Boy has alot of high school drop outs and republicans watching while Jon Stewart has College Graduates and Democrats/Moderates/Libertarians/Green watching.

Also Billy Boy only has "Kill Darkies! Kill Jews! Eat Babies!" basic republicans on while Jon Stewart has Bill Clinton, John McCain, John Kerry, Colin Powell, a mix up, not all left or right but both and the powerhouses of both. When was the last time Billy Boy had anyone with power on his show? No Cabinet Members, only dickless(I don't mean women I mean senators from like Alaska or Rhode Island) republican senators that have no power to do anything, no President In Run(Kerry, Yee Haw Dean, so forth)