It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

O'Reilly Equates 9/11 Truthers With Terrorists

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 11:12 PM
link   
Anok,
You do the crime, be man enough to except and do the time....and punishment thereof.

Why 'cry' about inmate rights when it is apparent that they did not give a crap about their victims rights? Makes no frailin' sense. The best they deserve is a place to sleep, a blanket, pillow, meals, access to bathing and latrines, and mail. Anything more than that is far more than they deserved or gave in relation to their victims, etc., period.

[edit on 14-10-2006 by Seekerof]




posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
:

"If you had the evidence SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE would take the evidence"

When O'Reily challenged him to present his best evidence or his "best shot" he just couldn't do it. He knew O'Reily would shame his 'evidence' on national TV.

They've got nothing and they know it.

Loved the way they cut him off at the end.


He did bring up WTC 7 but O'Reily cut him off. This the most useful tactic employed by O'Reily when somebody attempts to bring up a valid point. Interupt and insult.



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Why 'cry' about inmate rights when it is apparent that they did not give a crap about their victims rights? Makes no frailin' sense.


Look I don't want to go OT but you miss the point in your blind passion to judge others, does it make you feel more righteous or something?
Do you realize how many prisoners are there for victimless crimes?
Not every person in prison is a hardened criminal, like they want you to believe.
Most people in jail are no different than you. A lot are there because of unjust laws (drugs) and a corrupt legal system. Take this guy for example...


Paey, who bought painkillers, did not murder or maim anyone, yet prosecutor Scott Andringa thinks that it's right to send to prison for 25 years a wheelchair-bound man suffering extreme chronic pain who was trying to ease his agony.

www.painreliefnetwork.org...

Who was his victim that he didn't give a damn about?

I'm not crying for prisoner rights, I'm crying for human rights. There are more hardened criminals in the white house than in state prisons. The system is living contradiction. Black and white laws and punishment don't work because we as people have a hell of a lot of grey in us. Crime has gone down yet prison populations continue to increase.


WASHINGTON - America's prison population grew again in 2002 despite a declining crime rate, costing the federal government and states an estimated $40 billion a year at a time of rampant budget shortfalls.

The inmate population in 2002 of more than 2.1 million represented a 2.6 percent increase over 2001, according to a report released Sunday by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Preliminary FBI statistics showed a 0.2 percent drop in overall crime during the same span.

Source

Think with your brain, not your emotions.

[edit on 15/10/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   


Prison is hell, TV, peanut butter or 100 virgins, it's still hell.


And thats why its called PRISON, not summer camp. Personally Im sick of hearing about how bad prisoners have it in our prisons. They dont have the first clue of how GOOD they have it compared to most other countries. I wish we had more people like Joe Arpaio running our prison systems.



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999



Prison is hell, TV, peanut butter or 100 virgins, it's still hell.


And thats why its called PRISON, not summer camp. Personally Im sick of hearing about how bad prisoners have it in our prisons. They dont have the first clue of how GOOD they have it compared to most other countries. I wish we had more people like Joe Arpaio running our prison systems.


Whilte this is grosely off topic......i feel this statement is WRONG. apparently you never been to jail man...prisoners have it terrible in there. On top of daily fights, don't-give-a-crap guards, prisoners have to live with a very real fear and that's RAPE. Seriously, people may be like "oh well they shouldn't complain if they get rape because it's their fault for being in there". well that assumption is absoloutley WRONG because BEING RAPE was not part of their sentence.

And what about the kids who are in there for minor drug offenses? you telling me it's fair to stick kids busted for a couple ounces of pot (as an example of a minor criminal offense) in a jail cell with hardcore murderers and gang bangers?

so no, NOBODY has it good in prison...

[edit on 15-10-2006 by Spawwwn]



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
And thats why its called PRISON, not summer camp. Personally Im sick of hearing about how bad prisoners have it in our prisons. They dont have the first clue of how GOOD they have it compared to most other countries.


Blinded by self righteousness. Even the story I showed you about the disabled guy doesn't open your eyes...


If you're sick of hearing how bad it is in jail then stop making claims that it's not, and you won't have to hear people correct you.
And what does it matter if it's worse in other countries, you saying we should all reduce ourselves to the level of the worst that's out there? Wow, how forward thinking that is. I thought we'd advance from barbaric treatment of people?

In fact American jails are far worse than a lot of other countries...

What about this statement...


The report by the Justice Department agency found that 62 percent of people in jails have not been convicted, meaning many of them are awaiting trial.


Not even convicted of a crime yet! What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
How can the punishment fit a crime that hasn't been prosecuted yet?

More of you 'convicts' who don't give a damn about their victims (themselves)...


Mauer also criticized sentencing guidelines, which he said remove judges' discretion, and said arrests for drug and parole violations swell prisons.

"If we want to see the prison population reduced, we need a much more comprehensive approach to sentencing and drug policy," he said.


Source



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Come on guys get back on the topic, thank god O'Reilly isn't on mainstream news in the UK, hasn't anyone told him news is fact not opinion? ive seen his debating on a few streamed videos on the usual sites, hes shocking doesn't back up what he says with facts just name calling or calling whatever his opponant said as crap.

I think part of the problem is there are so many 24 hour news stations now, that they can't fill there time with just the news and have to resort to other methods. Well it is FOX after all, anything under the Murdoch media empire spurts out fear mongering rubbish thats fed down our throats, just look at The Sun & Sky News here in the UK.



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Look I don't want to go OT but you miss the point in your blind passion to judge others, does it make you feel more righteous or something?
Do you realize how many prisoners are there for victimless crimes?

Enlighten me, k?




Not every person in prison is a hardened criminal, like they want you to believe.
Most people in jail are no different than you. A lot are there because of unjust laws (drugs) and a corrupt legal system. Take this guy for example...


Paey, who bought painkillers, did not murder or maim anyone, yet prosecutor Scott Andringa thinks that it's right to send to prison for 25 years a wheelchair-bound man suffering extreme chronic pain who was trying to ease his agony.

www.painreliefnetwork.org...

One example?
Please, when you get around to it, post the percentage of those who are in jail that are innocent as compared to those that are not, k?




Who was his victim that he didn't give a damn about?

I suppose he should have gotten a better lawyer? I did say, "You do the crime, be man enough to ...." I guess you missed the implied "If," eh?




I'm not crying for prisoner rights, I'm crying for human rights.

"Human rights" does not call for TV, Cable, college educations, etc., does it?





There are more hardened criminals in the white house than in state prisons.

Are you implying this particular White House or in any White House staffing?
Otherwise, your simply spouting rhetorical rhetoric.




The system is living contradiction. Black and white laws and punishment don't work because we as people have a hell of a lot of grey in us. Crime has gone down yet prison populations continue to increase.

Then apparently if prison populations continue to increase, laws are continuing to be broken?
If you think that you can make better or clarify the laws better, then become a lawyer or judical advocate, you think?





WASHINGTON - America's prison population grew again in 2002 despite a declining crime rate, costing the federal government and states an estimated $40 billion a year at a time of rampant budget shortfalls.

The inmate population in 2002 of more than 2.1 million represented a 2.6 percent increase over 2001, according to a report released Sunday by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Preliminary FBI statistics showed a 0.2 percent drop in overall crime during the same span.

Source

Immaterial.
Please give us your explanation of why the prison population is increasing? Does it relate to illegal immigration? Laws being broken? What?




Think with your brain, not your emotions.

I will say it again: (IF) You do the crime, be man or woman enough to do the time and punishment. Seems logical to me and having no affiliation with "emotions."


[edit on 15-10-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

The report by the Justice Department agency found that 62 percent of people in jails have not been convicted, meaning many of them are awaiting trial.


Not even convicted of a crime yet! What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
How can the punishment fit a crime that hasn't been prosecuted yet?

I suppose you missed the mention of "awaiting trial"?
This means that they could not or did not have the means to post bail, are considered a hazard to society, thus were not given a bail option, etc., etc., and etc.

Surprising---then again--- you post such without investigating WHY those 62% are not out of jail and on the streets/at home awaiting TRIAL=aka: INNOCENT TILL PROVEN GUILTY BY A COURT OF LAW AND YOUR PEERS.


[edit on 15-10-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Seekerof I'm not going to continue arguing this with you as it's OT, but I will say your view on crime and prison is very narrow and black and white.
I only showed one example because it's not the topic of this thread. But one example is one too many.
If crime has gone down why are they putting more non-violent people in jail?
You must have miss-read that crime is down but prison population is up and most of that rise is non-violent victimless drug possession. So no victim to 'not give a dam about', the whole point of my response to you that you keep wanting to expand on.


Over 80% of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 was due to drug convictions...

Source

All I'm saying is not all prisoners are violent criminals creating helpless victims, and I'm not saying prison should be cushy, just that it isn't cushy like you want to think.

[edit on 16/10/2006 by ANOK]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I can't stand O'Reilly. I can't watch him. It's too frustrating. He invites people on and then he yapps the whole time and we don't get to here what the guest has to say.

That being said ... It is my opinion that anyone who blames the victims (those that died on 9/11; their families; and the population of this country in general) for 9/11 are indeed idiots and possibly on the same road of evil as the terrorists.

Ya'll aren't going to like that opinon, but I'm entitled to have one and it's the truth.

Blame the victim = evil. The terrorists weren't victims no matter how anyone wants to falsely paint it. Those who died and those who suffered from the 9/11 terrorist attacks are the vicitms. And they did nothing to deserve what happened to them.

NOTHING.



[edit on 10/16/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
Besides that, can't you see the points O'Reily was making? Watch the video and listen to what he's saying. Why can't the scholars get their story published anywhere outside Prisonplanet and Infowars? NO media from ANY nation is buying into it.


Well you're wrong there, there's lots of media outside the US covering 911. Some of them are putting the blame with the US government.

And can't YOU see what O'Reilly is doing? Always the same tactic. "Deny by proxy"
"Oh the media isn't covering it so it isn't true"
"Oh nobody is blowing the whistle so it can't be true"
"Oh Bush is an idiot he can't do that"
"Oh they wouldn't kill 3000 Americans"

Never do you hear them say well this and this piece of evidence shows this.. ever!

And you fall for that stupidity?

Worst of all, you spin the whole deal and want to convince someone, probably yourself, that there's no evidence to support what we're saying?
How about the official story being physically impossible? Would that hint to the falsity of it?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
ya know whats frightening...Bush has more crediblity (and that's not much by a long shot) than Bill O'Rielly.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Black_Fox


(PrisonPlanet)- a previous case in which his false charges led to the arrest of another professor and charges of supporting terrorism which were later dismissed.



Sammy Al-Arian, a former professor at USF who was charged and later acquitted of helping to lead a Palestinian terrorist group that carried out suicide bombings against Israel.
www.prisonplanet.com...



[edit on 14/10/06 by JAK]


First, the source. A partial truth is a lie. No difference. Why site a source that is well known for publishing partial truths to mislead readers?


Al-Arian, a former university professor, was arrested by the United States government in 2003 on charges of funding terrorists. He was acquitted on eight of the 17 charges against him last December after a six month trial with three co-defendants. On April 14, 2006 al-Arian pleaded guilty to a single count of conspiracy to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and agreed to be deported. In return, federal prosecutors agreed to drop the remaining eight charges against him.
Al-Arian was sentenced to the 57 months in prison and given him credit for time served. He is to serve the balance of 19 months and then be deported.


Wikipedia Article

It would seem you are saying that because you don't personally like this commentator it means the 9/11 Conspiracy Theory is therefore true?

Second - I've seen this guy on other shows. I remember the first time I saw him the interviewer gave him a chance to present his best evidence. He turned pale white and sat with his mouth open for a few seconds and then repeated the same canned statement he had already made. He never did provide any evidence. Either he did not have any evidence or he chose to hide it for some reason?

Third - If this group of his had any evidence, why is this not being covered by the Anti-Bush media? I would think this would be on the front page of the New York Times constantly. To me this means that the professionals in the heavily biased Anti-Bush media have not been able to find any evidence. Since they are professionals at this type of research, I'd say this is a very important fact is it not?

Fourth- Hundreds if not thousands of people would have to know about this. They would have to keep silent for the rest of their lives. They would have to be OK with the fact that thousands of innocent people were slaughtered. They would all be mass murderers and would have to live with that. Where are these people? There is no way that some of them would not have come clean by now.

I've read most of the threads and the links to do with this topic. There is plenty of speculation. Lot's of supposition. No evidence! I think we all understand you hate Bush. How does making up stories that most people consider fantasy help your cause? It does not. It destroys your own credibility. I can not find a single person outside of ATS and the hate Bush websites who believes this theory. When I ask people look at me like I've lost my mind. Even the Democrats think it is nuts. I'm not a Republican and I don't care for Bush's policies, but I'm not willing lie or invent a fictional conspiracy to attack him. That's just dumb.

I predict that this conspiracy will never produce a single proof that would not be laughed out of court. I also predict this will go on for decades and that lots of people will make money by writing books and making tapes. I predict that plenty of naive' people will mail in their checks like good little sheeple. I'm sure that the people taking advantage of you will laugh all the way to the bank. I know they don't believe this stuff and they are having a great time at your expense. This is the same sort of bias and stupidity that keeps the KKK in operation.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Sorry to go off topic mods.

Blaine,

Are you a part of the West Borrow Baptists? I saw in your signature a saying that the Phelps crowd love to quote. Just a question.

On topic. I have seen enough evidence to make up my mind about how the towers fell at least. I have seen blasts, squibs and most of all, the towers core being completely disintegrated into itself when the surrounding tower had already fallen.

I doubt that there is any physical evidence left for anyone to find. But, observable evidence is also evidence.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   
Hate to break the rules with a one liner, but: # O'reilly, apparently he has zero understanding of what it means to be FREE. Fascist #er.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
Sorry to go off topic mods.

Blaine,

Are you a part of the West Borrow Baptists?


No, I am not. It's just a line of scripture that I thought applied well to this board.

I think the most powerful evidence that this conspiracy did not occur is the number of people who would have been involved. We see proof all the time that our government is incapable of keeping a secret. If this theory is true someone would have slipped up by now. How can anyone on one hand believe the government to be incompetent and then on the other hand accept that a conspiracy involving this many disparate people be carried out flawlessly? I do believe lots of bad things are happening due to the incompetence of the Bush administration. I don't hate my country because of it though. I also believe that many people have been blinded by hatred and are willing to blindly accept anything negative about the Bush administration true or not. I think a lot of this is being spurred on by Anti - US activists who are knowingly fabricating information. Those squibs for example. Are you an expert in this field or have you relied on information gleaned from anti-Bush websites and Bush haters? Have you ever asked yourself why newspapers that never miss a chance to bash Bush and Company won't touch this with a ten foot pole? Have you asked yourself why the Democratic Party has not acted on this? Did you do real research or just parrot what you have read on anti-Bush and anti-government websites? Have you branded O'Reilly a liar because you have evidence that he is lying or because you hate him for some reason? Why did Bin Laden lie about being involved? How was Bush able to get the New York Times to help with this cover-up? They would have to be involved or they would have been reporting on this. Have you balanced the evidence on both sides of the argument without bias? How many hours have you spent trying to prove that the 9/11 tragedy happened just as it was presented? Any at all? When someone makes a claim do you verify that they are qualified to make that claim. Would a judge allow them to testify as an expert in a court? If not why do you believe them?

Lets look at James H. Fetzerfor a moment. He earns a great deal of his income by advocating conspiracies in books and as a paid speaker. Since he is apparently retired from the academic world I think it would be fair to say he earns most of his income this way. He has an often expressed hatred for Republicans and speaks openly about it. He has a history of making unfounded accusations of horrible atrocities committed by Republicans but never seems to have any proof. Does he have a motive to promote these conspiracy theories for financial gain? Yes he does. Is he an expert in any field that would qualify him to comment on what happened at the World Trade Centers? No he is not. Does he have a history of profiting off wild conspiracy theories? Yes he does. When given the opportunity on national television to present his best evidence has he come up with any? No he has not. He has had multiple opportunities and has had lot's of time to prepare his answers, but he still can not give any proof. He is an experienced orator, teacher and author so you can not blame this on lack of experience or ability. I can only conclude he has no evidence and it is all speculation without proof. He appears to have no problem when talking to a biased audience who agrees with him without knowing if he is telling the truth. That's who people like him rely on to buy his books and pay to hear him speak. They never do well when confronted with an intelligent interviewer who ask good questions. They always respond with more wild accusations and spew more hatred to stir up their customers to buy more books. They always try and turn the anger towards the interviewer who they wrongly accuse of being in on the conspiracy. If he has evidence why not take it to the DNC and let them start impeachment proceedings?

If anyone on ATS has proof of this conspiracy, why not give it to the DNC so they can impeach Bush? What are you waiting for?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Hate to break the rules with a one liner, but: # O'reilly, apparently he has zero understanding of what it means to be FREE. Fascist #er.


How has O'Reilly taken away your freedoms? Is it not you who is wanting to take away his right to free speech? Or does free speech only apply to those who agree with you? Why do you have to use the "f" word to express yourself? Or did you mean you want to have sex with O'Reilly? Are you old enough to be on the internet without parental supervision?



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Let's not get crazy.

You've made a good point, Blaine, but so has SN. O'Reilly's MO is to bring a guest on his show, and either kiss their butt, or destroy them, depending on what side of the issue they're on.

Surely you can admit that O'Reilly could have given Fetzer a chance to say his piece, then this thread would be about how well/awful Fetzer did presenting his case. But instead the segment was dominated by O'Reilly insulting this and that. This gives every hardline republican an ego boost, which is of course what the show is for.

I watch the Factor for the same reason I watch other networks; occassionally, something real pops out that I didn't know about. But it is a fact that O'Reilly, and FOX as a whole, is a conservative propoganda machine.



posted on Oct, 16 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Discuss the topic, and not your fellow members.

.....a bloated gas-bag ..... a raging hypocrite, a pervert, and a moron..... freak show ..... the nutter ..... pathetic wretch..... poster-boy for prophylactics?

Better luck next time God, this one's a dud...



This would lead one to believe you don't like O'Reilly? It also seems to be that you are blaming this on God? Or that you hate God too? Nutter? You must be British? Don't be so shy! If you don't like him say so!


Not what I would expect from someone adult enough to be a "moderator". Sounds more like rantings from an illiterate school child.

I don't suppose you have any proof of the 9/11 Conspiracy that would be admissible in court? Anything at all? I have a contact in the media who could get it into the NYT. All I would need is a single piece of credible evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join