O Reilly Video ROFL

I dont like doing this but i kinda agree with oreilly. The writer who didnt show was trying to compare american morals with those of the terrorists. The american govt didnt kill those men, the terrorists did. Oreilly really got pissed though.
 
yep. that sure was funny. ha. ha. ha.

O Reilly was right (it does happen every now and then). It's a lonnng stretch to claim the American gov't killed the marines.
 
What the writer was trying to do was to point out that it is more the government's fault that those soldiers are dead rather than the ACLU and Amnesty International, as O'Reilly has been claiming.
 
No, he's not right. He completely misrepresented what the guy was saying. He plays off of people's short term memories and lack of attention to say things that sound alright, but aren't true.
 
i hope bill o'reilly gets syphilis. This video didn't show him at his worst, there are plenty of other reasons he should get every STD possible. If you don't hate him, you're wrong.
 
Another O'Reilly gem:

"It just depends on how you want to wage the war. If we wage the war the way Saddam handled Iraq, then we would have already won. That means martial law, torture, murder, kicking in doors. You know, Saddam controlled that country for 25 years. He didn't have any insurrections. He didn't have bombs going off. And half the country wanted to kill him. You know, all the Shia hated him. And how'd he do it? Through terror. So we could do it. But then, you know, as soon as you look at one of these guys cross-eyed, the ACLU's got you sued."
 
His point with that is the fact that we are NOT acting like saddam. He is saying that meer fact thta we are having an insurgency like this and this kind of disorders means we are handling it in if not the right way a better way.

If we were acting like Saddam's regime, like many say we are and liek that article said, we would have no insurgency and no civil unrest.

Point is we are not acting like Saddam, when a bunch of people say we are, and it's wrong and slanderous, like O'Reilly pointed out.

If you take his words without the meaning, well then yeah.
 
I see your point, and it's a good one. But O'Reilly is not that kind of reasonable person. He's a crazy old man that actually believes that we should run Iraq like Saddam did.

Here are quotes from his show:

"So because -- what you have here now is a tipping point in history. A tipping point in history. So you have to win the Iraq situation. Now, to me, they're not fighting it hard enough. See, if I'm president, I've got probably another 50-60,000 with orders to shoot on sight anybody violating curfews. Shoot 'em on sight. That's me. President O'Reilly, curfew in Ramadi, 7 o'clock at night. You're on the street, you're dead. I shoot you right between the eyes. OK?

That's how I'd run that country -- just like Saddam ran it. Saddam didn't have explosions. He didn't have bombers, did he? Because if you got out of line, you're dead."

On a separate show:

" "Talking Points" believes the Bush administration has to stop being defensive about waging war. At this point, the new Iraqi government should declare martial law in areas controlled by insurgents. That means anyone can be arrested and shoot-on-sight curfews.

Saddam was able to control Iraq, as you know, and defeat insurgencies against him. The new Iraqi government can do the same, but it needs to get much tougher.

The Bush administration also needs to begin challenging those who are helping the enemy. The ACLU, for example, opposes just about every anti-terror strategy. This organization should be exposed."

The BBC also helps the enemy by consistently slanting the Iraq war coverage and portraying the coalition as villains. The vile Air America Radio network does the same thing."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top