Bill O'Reilly: The American Imam of the radical Madrases?

[Nickdfresh]

O'Reilly's campaign against murdered doctor
The Fox News star had compared Tiller to a Nazi, called him a "baby killer," and warned of "Judgment Day"

By Gabriel Winant

May. 31, 2009 |

When his show airs tomorrow, Bill O'Reilly will most certainly decry the death of Kansas doctor George Tiller, who was killed Sunday while attending church services with his wife. Tiller, O'Reilly will say, was a man who was guilty of barbaric acts, but a civilized society does not resort to lawless murder, even against its worst members. And O'Reilly, we can assume, will genuinely mean this.

But there's no other person who bears as much responsibility for the characterization of Tiller as a savage on the loose, killing babies willy-nilly thanks to the collusion of would-be sophisticated cultural elites, a bought-and-paid-for governor and scofflaw secular journalists. Tiller's name first appeared on "The Factor" on Feb. 25, 2005. Since then, O'Reilly and his guest hosts have brought up the doctor on 28 more episodes, including as recently as April 27 of this year. Almost invariably, Tiller is described as "Tiller the Baby Killer."

Tiller, O'Reilly likes to say, "destroys fetuses for just about any reason right up until the birth date for $5,000." He's guilty of "Nazi stuff," said O'Reilly on June 8, 2005; a moral equivalent to NAMBLA and al-Qaida, he suggested on March 15, 2006. "This is the kind of stuff happened in Mao's China, Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union," said O'Reilly on Nov. 9, 2006.

O'Reilly has also frequently linked Tiller to his longtime obsession, child molestation and rape. Because a young teenager who received an abortion from Tiller could, by definition, have been a victim of statutory rape, O'Reilly frequently suggested that the clinic was covering up for child rapists (rather than teenage boyfriends) by refusing to release records on the abortions performed.

When Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline, an O'Reilly favorite who faced harsh criticism for seeking Tiller's records, was facing electoral defeat by challenger Paul Morrison, O'Reilly said, "Now we don't endorse candidates here, but obviously, that would be a colossal mistake. Society must afford some protection for viable babies and children who are raped." (Morrison ultimately unseated Kline.)

This is where O'Reilly's campaign against George Tiller becomes dangerous. While he never advocated anything violent or illegal, the Fox bully repeatedly portrayed the doctor as a murderer on the loose, allowed to do whatever he wanted by corrupt and decadent authorities. "Also, it looks like Dr. Tiller, who some call Tiller the Baby Killer, is spending a large amount of money in order to get Mr. Morrison elected. That opens up all kinds of questions," said O'Reilly on Nov. 6, 2006, in one of many suggestions that Tiller was improperly influencing the election.

Tiller's excuses for performing late-term abortions, O'Reilly suggested, were frou-frou, New Age, false ailments: The woman might have a headache or anxiety, or have been dumped by her boyfriend. She might be "depressed," scoffed O'Reilly, which he dismissed as "feeling a bit blue and carr[ying] a certified check." There was, he proposed on Jan. 5, 2007, a kind of elite conspiracy of silence on Tiller. "Yes, OK, but we know about the press. But it becomes a much more intense problem when you have a judge, confronted with evidence of criminal wrongdoing, who throws it out on some technicality because he wants to be liked at the country club. Then it's intense."

Tiller, said O'Reilly on Jan. 6 of this year, was a major supporter of then-Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. "I think it's unfairly characterized as just a grip and grin relationship. He was a pretty big supporter of hers." She had cashed her campaign check from Tiller, "doesn't seem to be real upset about this guy operating a death mill, which is exactly what it is in her state, does she?" he asked on July 14 of last year. "Maybe she'll -- maybe she'll pardon him," he scoffed two months ago.

This is where it gets most troubling. O'Reilly's language describing Tiller, and accusing the state and its elites of complicity in his actions, could become extremely vivid. On June 12, 2007, he said, "Yes, I think we all know what this is. And if the state of Kansas doesn't stop this man, then anybody who prevents that from happening has blood on their hands as the governor does right now, Governor Sebelius."

Three days later, he added, "No question Dr. Tiller has blood on his hands. But now so does Governor Sebelius. She is not fit to serve. Nor is any Kansas politician who supports Tiller's business of destruction. I wouldn't want to be these people if there is a Judgment Day. I just -- you know ... Kansas is a great state, but this is a disgrace upon everyone who lives in Kansas. Is it not?"

This characterization of Tiller fits exactly into ancient conservative, paranoid stories: a decadent, permissive and callous elite tolerates moral monstrosities that every common-sense citizen just knows to be awful. Conspiring against our folk wisdom, O'Reilly says, the sophisticates have shielded Tiller from the appropriate, legal consequences for his deeds. It's left to "judgment day" to give him what's coming.

O'Reilly didn't tell anyone to do anything violent, but he did put Tiller in the public eye, and help make him the focus of a movement with a history of violence against exactly these kinds of targets (including Tiller himself, who had already been shot). In those circumstances, flinging around words like "blood on their hands," "pardon," "country club" and "judgment day" was sensationally irresponsible.

Watch excerpts of O'Reilly's attacks on Tiller at the link on Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/05/31/tiller/)

[FORD]

I suggest we waterboard these terrorists immediately.....

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/CRIME/06/02/kansas.doctor.killed/art.roeder.mug.jpg
Scott Roeder - terrorist murderer

http://www.operationrescuetheft.com/images/randallterry-0102.jpg
Randall Terry - terrorist organizer

http://www.jossip.com/wp/docs/2009/03/bill-o-reilly-freaks-out.jpg
Bill O'Reilly - terrorist propagandist

[Nickdfresh]

I hope his family sues the fuck out of O'Really?...

And I think they might just win...

[thome]

By Gabriel Winant

Her op about something that has no other meaning, more than, a chance for O'Rielly haters to want to see, O'Rielly dead.

I am sure the other news stations over the last 40 years of this doctors, -life in the press- should be involved in the class action suit against the, O'Rielly and Free Press.

I think this has little to do with -The Doctor- and more like a witch hunt against O'Rielly, and a chance to also slip in some anti republican retoric.

I think Ms. Winant is more of a hate promoter than she even sees.

But, she got her editorial op piece posted and got the check by now .

If something happends to Bill can we sue her..?.. as far as she is concerned, she is already a, "person of interest" if anything dastardly happends to O'Rielly.

[Big Train]

So if someone murders O'Reilly because they have watched Olbermann make him out to be the Antichrist for years now, will he get the same treatment?

So opposing someone's viewpoint and actions, even being colorful "blood on your hands" kinds of comments (which let's face it, Olby, Hannity, Maddow, Dobbs, Cafferty, Matthews) they all say, now equates to be an Imam of hate speech? C,mon now...

[Nickdfresh]

So if someone murders O'Reilly because they have watched Olbermann make him out to be the Antichrist for years now, will he get the same treatment?

Nobody's murdered O'Reilly. And I've failed to hear the inflammatory language of "baby killer," "murder," etc...


So opposing someone's viewpoint and actions, even being colorful "blood on your hands" kinds of comments (which let's face it, Olby, Hannity, Maddow, Dobbs, Cafferty, Matthews) they all say, now equates to be an Imam of hate speech? C,mon now...

Oh please, he continuously listed the guys address, harassed him, and "ambushed" him with a camera crew and all but carried out a campaign against him not that different than Goebbels Antisemitic propaganda of distortion...

[Big Train]

Right, and being characterized night after night, week after week, by Olby as the "Worst Person In the World" is not along those same lines?

So your REALLY willing to make the leap that O'Reilly is to blame for this man's death?

All I'm saying is it's stupid to call it hate speech and even more so to say his hate speech is any worse than any other reporter. That is hypocritical. Not to mention the ACLU's fav phrase "it's a slippery slope".

[LoungeMachine]

All I'm saying is it's stupid to call it hate speech and even more so to say his hate speech is any worse than any other reporter. That is hypocritical. Not to mention the ACLU's fav phrase "it's a slippery slope".

What's "stupid", is to call O'Reilly a "reporter"

:gulp:

[thome]

standin, just came all the way over here to throw a pie in my face and groan at me without commenting within this thread at all.

Does that quantify as a comment; to simply groan at my comment, or is this a attack on my personality presence,,>>??

If I "wake up dead" or you "find me gone missing"..I want you all to, fukking sue standin...or s=neak in the alley with sally .

[LoungeMachine]

Congratulations thome.....

You just gave her exactly what she wanted. Well done.

:gulp:

[thome]

Congratulations thome.....

You just gave her exactly what she wanted. Well done.

:gulp:

After reading your comment:

I just ran all over the house looking for my wallet.

[GAR]

"who some call Tiller the Killer" is a quotation, dumbass.

When you're story includes someone's quote, you don't have to append the slander of others as your own opinion.

[binnie]

The is a bitter irony in pro-lifer's killing doctors.

If it wasn't so repulsive it'd make me howl with laughter...

[FORD]

The is a bitter irony in pro-lifer's killing doctors.

If it wasn't so repulsive it'd make me howl with laughter...

Not only that, but most of them are also pro-war and pro-death penalty.

Guess "pro-life" only applies BEFORE you're born.

[thome]

and ... Most pro-abortionists are anti war..whodd'a thunk it..?

[FORD]

could be.... I don't know any "pro abortionists".

[GAR]

could be.... I don't know any "pro abortionists".

Proabortionists hide behind the phrase "right-to-choose" which means "right to murder" more like.

Proabortionists hide behind their guilt and their nightmares of the unborn dead beckoning them from the grave.

Proabortionists attack people who view life as precious, to avoid the background noise of their conscience grinding in the background everytime the subject of abortion comes up.

Proabortionists who perform 60,000 lateterm abortions (meaning, those with already functioning brains, hearts, internal organs etc. who could possibly survive outside the womb in an incubator) earning millions of dollars in the process, deserve no pity for every bullet that finds them.

[FORD]

And once again GAyR supports political assassination.

Agent "Mike" of the Secret Service will be very interested in this.......

[Nickdfresh]

Right, and being characterized night after night, week after week, by Olby as the "Worst Person In the World" is not along those same lines?

So your REALLY willing to make the leap that O'Reilly is to blame for this man's death?

I never said he was directly to blame, but I believe he and his ilk are culpable.

Secondly, Olbermann wasn't pandering to a specific group of people whose fringe has resorted to terrorist violence for their cause of saving the babies. Frequently. Nor was he the first abortion provider murdered by an angry loser of a man who couldn't even take care of his own wife and kid when they fled him....


All I'm saying is it's stupid to call it hate speech and even more so to say his hate speech is any worse than any other reporter. That is hypocritical. Not to mention the ACLU's fav phrase "it's a slippery slope".

I didn't use the words hate speech. I've merely insinuated that it was either persistent libel and defamation that O'Reilly whorishly pandered to his crowd for ratings. Does anyone really believe he gives a fuck about the unborn?

He wants his big paying media stage gig, then use it responsibly! Or get sued!

[Kristy]

I do my best to stay away from most arguments that float around on here because I think most people on this forum are better than their anger but that was the most asinine shit I've ever read Gar.

I myself was raised in a stringent Catholic family and repeatedly told abortion was a grievous sin if not murder and how my church, God and even my family would abandoned me if I ever had one (you see, Catholicism is kind of a cult but that's a much different story) but to say right-to-choose is equatable with right-to-murder is stupid.

If you pulled your head out of your bloated ass for even let's say, 3 seconds Gar, you'd realize that most women don't see abortion as a means to an end for an unwanted pregnancy. Many who seek out abortion as an alternative do so out of the lack of the father being around, abandonment of their family to help raise the child or even having proper or any health insurance to fund the medical bills of birth (which on average is around $18,000 more if the baby is a c-section).

I myself am very pro-choice and never once attacked anyone who see life as being precious. ALL life is precious even for assholes like you. And this whole "background noise of their conscious grinding" just what in the fuck are you talking about? Women (no, that's too confining) people who have had to make the difficult choice for abortion hardly avoid the subject when it comes up much less hide behind the graves of the unborn dead. If anything it's people like you who want them to feel guilty rather than give a shit or have any knowledge in the reasons why they choose abortion in the first place. Much more easier to put on blinders and point a finger and scream words like "murderer" and "harlot" to a woman going into an abortion clinic than it is to see she is making one of the most difficult decisions in her life which brings me to your last point.

Late-term abortion is in most cases a last resort for women who would be in grave danger themselves if they saw the birth carry to term. But it appears you also blindly buy into the rhetoric of shitbrains like Randal Terry who paint abortion with a large brush. And even if the baby is carried to term what kind of a life does it have if an amniocentesis test gives results that the child will have no proper life whatsoever? Maybe hours if not minutes to live in an excruciating pain from a rare disease? Or that the birth will kill the mother? Or both on delivery?

Every mother wants to see their baby born healthy so they at least have some chance at a decent life and I know personally that if I ever have a child I'd want the same but if my kid had some sort of rare genetic disease upon which they'll never know the aesthetics of a proper life it's not up to assholes like Terry or any other anti-abortion intimation tactic to tell me what I can to cannot do with my child. It hardly makes one pro-abortionist on any level you retard.

And your last sentence was fucking frightening. Let me see if I understand you right. So to reiterate, if my life (or an woman's life) was in danger of dying if I carried [the] child to term and I choose abortion knowing full well the kid would have no chance in it whatsoever you still label me a murderer and put a bullet in my head or that of the doctor performing the procedure? Do you even see the stupidity of the irony of your sick statement?

And even if they do have healthy organs, etc. who is going to foot the bill to keep them alive? You? Seems a lot of anti-abortionists speak in a language only they comprehend. Carry the baby to term knowing that it will soon die a painful death or, without the aid of family or a father and then bitch about how the same mother is a welfare whore when she seeks government assistance in raising the child alone. After all, these same anti-abortionists are also protesting sex education and use of birth control that would abbreviate a lot of those 60,000 unwanted pregnancies to begin with. Yeah, you're right, asshole. It would be much more easier to place a bullet in a doctor's skull than to actually see the bigger picture.

[Nitro Express]

Yeah. Let's kill someone at church because we believe in life. George Carlin was right. The world is nothing more than a fucking freak show.

As far as O'riely goes, he should be waterboaded with Hilary Clinton's piss.

[Nitro Express]

My mom worked in the medical proffession when abortions were illegal. She saw the resulting carnage of black market abortions first hand. She told me it's much better that it's legal. Basically. You can't legislate morals. There are many reasons abortions happen. It's a complicated situation and something the govt. isn't the best entity to make the decision on.

[FORD]

As far as O'riely goes, he should be waterboaded with Hilary Clinton's piss.

The perverted fuck would probably enjoy that, actually.

[FORD]

My mom worked in the medical proffession when abortions were illegal. She saw the resulting carnage of black market abortions first hand. She told me it's much better that it's legal. Basically. You can't legislate morals. There are many reasons abortions happen. It's a complicated situation and something the govt. isn't the best entity to make the decision on.

Yeah..... that's pretty much where I'm at. Personally, the thought of abortion sickens me, and if it were in my power, I'd like it not to exist at all. But making it illegal will never do that. Eliminating unwanted pregancies would, in about 95% of the cases. Not tolerating rape or incest would eliminate the remaining 4%, and then you would have that 1% where it's medically necessary.

Main problem with this is that most of the self proclaimed "pro lifers" are as opposed to birth control and sex education as they are to abortion itself. Thus creating the very problem they whine about. (some of them probably fuck their own daughters too)

[Kristy]

The perverted fuck would probably enjoy that, actually.

Most likely he'd write a book about it in another lame attempt to pass himself off as being a author.

[standin]

I do my best to stay away from most arguments that float around on here because I think most people on this forum are better than their anger but that was the most asinine shit I've ever read Gar.

I myself was raised in a stringent Catholic family and repeatedly told abortion was a grievous sin if not murder and how my church, God and even my family would abandoned me if I ever had one (you see, Catholicism is kind of a cult but that's a much different story) but to say right-to-choose is equatable with right-to-murder is stupid.

If you pulled your head out of your bloated ass for even let's say, 3 seconds Gar, you'd realize that most women don't see abortion as a means to an end for an unwanted pregnancy. Many who seek out abortion as an alternative do so out of the lack of the father being around, abandonment of their family to help raise the child or even having proper or any health insurance to fund the medical bills of birth (which on average is around $18,000 more if the baby is a c-section).

I myself am very pro-choice and never once attacked anyone who see life as being precious. ALL life is precious even for assholes like you. And this whole "background noise of their conscious grinding" just what in the fuck are you talking about? Women (no, that's too confining) people who have had to make the difficult choice for abortion hardly avoid the subject when it comes up much less hide behind the graves of the unborn dead. If anything it's people like you who want them to feel guilty rather than give a shit or have any knowledge in the reasons why they choose abortion in the first place. Much more easier to put on blinders and point a finger and scream words like "murderer" and "harlot" to a woman going into an abortion clinic than it is to see she is making one of the most difficult decisions in her life which brings me to your last point.

Late-term abortion is in most cases a last resort for women who would be in grave danger themselves if they saw the birth carry to term. But it appears you also blindly buy into the rhetoric of shitbrains like Randal Terry who paint abortion with a large brush. And even if the baby is carried to term what kind of a life does it have if an amniocentesis test gives results that the child will have no proper life whatsoever? Maybe hours if not minutes to live in an excruciating pain from a rare disease? Or that the birth will kill the mother? Or both on delivery?

Every mother wants to see their baby born healthy so they at least have some chance at a decent life and I know personally that if I ever have a child I'd want the same but if my kid had some sort of rare genetic disease upon which they'll never know the aesthetics of a proper life it's not up to assholes like Terry or any other anti-abortion intimation tactic to tell me what I can to cannot do with my child. It hardly makes one pro-abortionist on any level you retard.

And your last sentence was fucking frightening. Let me see if I understand you right. So to reiterate, if my life (or an woman's life) was in danger of dying if I carried [the] child to term and I choose abortion knowing full well the kid would have no chance in it whatsoever you still label me a murderer and put a bullet in my head or that of the doctor performing the procedure? Do you even see the stupidity of the irony of your sick statement?

And even if they do have healthy organs, etc. who is going to foot the bill to keep them alive? You? Seems a lot of anti-abortionists speak in a language only they comprehend. Carry the baby to term knowing that it will soon die a painful death or, without the aid of family or a father and then bitch about how the same mother is a welfare whore when she seeks government assistance in raising the child alone. After all, these same anti-abortionists are also protesting sex education and use of birth control that would abbreviate a lot of those 60,000 unwanted pregnancies to begin with. Yeah, you're right, asshole. It would be much more easier to place a bullet in a doctor's skull than to actually see the bigger picture.

Agreed. Could not say it better myself.

[jhale667]

Main problem with this is that most of the self proclaimed "pro lifers" are as opposed to birth control and sex education as they are to abortion itself. Thus creating the very problem they whine about.


Exactly. Another huge fucking hole in their logic, apart from the "not caring about what happens to the kid after" bit.
They want total control over people's reproductive rights, not just abortion. They want to also control when and how you get to have sex (only missionary, and only for the purpose of procreation, dammit! No oral!!)
What a bunch of freaks.

[Nickdfresh]

I do my best to stay away from most arguments that float around on here because I think most people on this forum are better than their anger but that was the most asinine shit I've ever read Gar.

....

Especially since Gar seems to relish the idea of adult sons in the US military being killed in Iraq, so he can taunt their mothers over it...

[Nickdfresh]

Proabortionists hide behind the phrase "right-to-choose" which means "right to murder" more like.

Proabortionists hide behind their guilt and their nightmares of the unborn dead beckoning them from the grave.

Proabortionists attack people who view life as precious, to avoid the background noise of their conscience grinding in the background everytime the subject of abortion comes up.

Proabortionists who perform 60,000 lateterm abortions (meaning, those with already functioning brains, hearts, internal organs etc. who could possibly survive outside the womb in an incubator) earning millions of dollars in the process, deserve no pity for every bullet that finds them.

You douchetube!!

You were making fun of the fact a US soldier/marine was being deployed to Iraq and taunted his mother with the many ways he could be killed. How much did his life mean to you, asshole?

Fuck you and the gay fucking horse you rode in on, ass-lapper...

[kwame k]

Yup, what a fucking hypocrite!

[FORD]

Yeah, right. And this coming from a guy who posts an op-ed blaming Bill O'Reilly for the death of a Late Term Abortionist. How's the weather up there on planet Jackalope.

Loofa Boy made a point of featuring venomous tirades against Dr. Tiller several times on his radio and TV shows, at times even suggesting vigilante acts of violence

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Af-kE-iu3hg&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Af-kE-iu3hg&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Big Train]

I never said he was directly to blame, but I believe he and his ilk are culpable.

Secondly, Olbermann wasn't pandering to a specific group of people whose fringe has resorted to terrorist violence for their cause of saving the babies. Frequently. Nor was he the first abortion provider murdered by an angry loser of a man who couldn't even take care of his own wife and kid when they fled him....

He and his ilk (Olberman, Maddow, Matthews, Dobbs etc.). My point is that they ALL pander to specific groups or causes constantly. Olby's "Worst Person in the World" could easily cause a nut to hurt or kill someone. I'm saying in all of those instances where that were to happen, they would be culpable? I hate Olbermann, but I wouldn't hang that on him.

I didn't use the words hate speech. I've merely insinuated that it was either persistent libel and defamation that O'Reilly whorishly pandered to his crowd for ratings. Does anyone really believe he gives a fuck about the unborn?

He wants his big paying media stage gig, then use it responsibly! Or get sued!

I don't believe Olbermann gives a fuck about charities either, just a way to look like the good guy on waterboarding. Keith "cares".

They should all be a lot more responsible and stick to the broader issue. I don't mind them bagging on specific organizations (Acorn seems to be the theme this week), but the broader theme or idea should always have the most emphasis.

[standin]

Exactly. Another huge fucking hole in their logic, apart from the "not caring about what happens to the kid after" bit.
They want total control over people's reproductive rights, not just abortion. They want to also control when and how you get to have sex (only missionary, and only for the purpose of procreation, dammit! No oral!!)
What a bunch of freaks.
I don't know of these laws you speak of, but I agree with ya totally.
If you are not willing to practice religious sex, you shouldn't be forced to be with people that do!

The Long Wait for Male Birth Control - TIME (http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1829107,00.html)
And once the male birth control comes on market, there should be no reason for secular unplanned pregnancies. Can't say the female went off the pill and didn't say, or the rubber broke. If a male has no intentions wanting the children he created he should be on birth control, use a rubber or practice sexual techniques that limit his exposure to the risk of creating children. If he doesn't give a damn about his genetic code to know and discus the risk before he spits it out, he sure shouldn't cry remorse. When a female morning after his genetic code. She has every right as the male not to finance the birth of abandoned genetic code. Especially when there is no contractual obligation to do so.

And no reason for unplanned pregnancies without documented marriage contracts.

There is no reason for those that want to practice birth control, not too.
Or if a male is sexing a female that does not use birth control for what ever reason. There will not be any excuse for accident.

Not everyone is skilled enough or disciplined enough to practice sex with no chemical or hormonal birth control, that is a given. But someone that knowingly has sex with no intention of practicing skill birth control or utilizes "weakened" rubber (you know it happens), that is rape. No matter if it is against the male or female. A female can at least take preventive measures, even if they are a hardship to do.

And then when some guy has sex with a female he has to trust her if she says she is on birth control.

Sex comes with financial responsibilities.

Sex comes with responsibility. Period. Persons that have random sex often, should practice protecting their off spring from disadvantage. If they give a damn. Male and female alike. But males more so, if they give a damn about termination.

Otherwise it is just forcing people into your ethical system.

If I could wave a magic wand, I would sterilize every body until they were 25. I would require family (parental) education for the 3 years prior to the reversal.:pullinghair:

[Nickdfresh]

He and his ilk (Olberman, Maddow, Matthews, Dobbs etc.). My point is that they ALL pander to specific groups or causes constantly. Olby's "Worst Person in the World" could easily cause a nut to hurt or kill someone. I'm saying in all of those instances where that were to happen, they would be culpable? I hate Olbermann, but I wouldn't hang that on him.

Oh fucking please!! Yet, no one actually "hurt" any one of his "worst person(s) in the world." What's funny though is how much you know about Olbermann's show despite being a professed hater, and how little I know despite being his 'liberal comrade.'


I don't believe Olbermann gives a fuck about charities either, just a way to look like the good guy on waterboarding. Keith "cares".

Right. So you distill this issue down to "well, but but but Keith Olbermann!!!!" Oh please, fucking spare me!! What does what Keith Olbermann does have anything to do with the fact that a guy O'Reilly vilified many occasions was murdered by a frothing loser nutbag?


They should all be a lot more responsible and stick to the broader issue. I don't mind them bagging on specific organizations (Acorn seems to be the theme this week), but the broader theme or idea should always have the most emphasis.

The point is that Fox and especially the shrill talking head pundits are disingenuously pandering and are fanning the very same flames of extrajudicial terrorist radicalism they so claim to detest in Islam...

[standin]

Loofa Boy made a point of featuring venomous tirades against Dr. Tiller several times on his radio and TV shows, at times even suggesting vigilante acts of violence

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Af-kE-iu3hg&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Af-kE-iu3hg&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Wow, that really hit home or what a coincidence. Today, I spent over a half an hour explaining why disassociation was the right thing to do. I guess it is not that big of a coincidence, I have been doing it almost daily for a couple months now (Longer actually, I am embarrassed to admit that I care for someone whose ethics (and them) scare and offend me).

[Big Train]

[I]He and his ilk (Olberman, Maddow,

Oh fucking please!! Yet, no one actually "hurt" any one of his "worst person(s) in the world." What's funny though is how much you know about Olbermann's show despite being a professed hater, and how little I know despite being his 'liberal comrade.'

Right. So you distill this issue down to "well, but but but Keith Olbermann!!!!" Oh please, fucking spare me!! What does what Keith Olbermann does have anything to do with the fact that a guy O'Reilly vilified many occasions was murdered by a frothing loser nutbag?

The point I'm trying to make is that Olbermann could be on this path with O'Reilly just as easily. It's not about Keith, I'm just using him as an example, as he would be a good counter example to O'Reilly. Anyone who baits like that could find themselves in that situation. I'm saying I don't think either would be culpable.

The point is that Fox and especially the shrill talking head pundits are disingenuously pandering and are fanning the very same flames of extrajudicial terrorist radicalism they so claim to detest in Islam...

Again, they are all doing that, it's kinda stupid to just call out one. They should all be called out for that. MSNBC should be called for it just the same. However, I don't think anyone who talks about something should be culpable. Unless O'Reilly said explicitly something along the lines of "Go murder that guy, or someone should murder him", being held responsible is a stretch.

[Nickdfresh]

The point I'm trying to make is that Olbermann could be on this path with O'Reilly just as easily. It's not about Keith, I'm just using him as an example, as he would be a good counter example to O'Reilly. Anyone who baits like that could find themselves in that situation. I'm saying I don't think either would be culpable.


Again, they are all doing that, it's kinda stupid to just call out one. They should all be called out for that. MSNBC should be called for it just the same. However, I don't think anyone who talks about something should be culpable. Unless O'Reilly said explicitly something along the lines of "Go murder that guy, or someone should murder him", being held responsible is a stretch.pr

When you're done getting Shrill O'Really's? nuts out of your mouth, let us know, 'kay?

Cause at the the end of the day, you're just asscovering for him by shifting blame and making it collective when at the end of the day Olbermann hasn't gotten anyone killed and O'Reilly has.

[GAR]

Oreilly has killed someone?

[Big Train]

When you're done getting Shrill O'Really's? nuts out of your mouth, let us know, 'kay?

Cause at the the end of the day, you're just asscovering for him by shifting blame and making it collective when at the end of the day Olbermann hasn't gotten anyone killed and O'Reilly has.

You really know how to miss a point, mmkay?

I just disagree with you. Unless he explicitly said "kill him" O'Reilly is not responsible. I would say the same thing about Olbermann. This will be the second or third time I said that, hope you can catch it this time.

[GAR]

Olberman's wig is awesome, I admires it (1) time.

[Nickdfresh]

You really know how to miss a point, mmkay?

I just disagree with you. Unless he explicitly said "kill him" O'Reilly is not responsible. I would say the same thing about Olbermann. This will be the second or third time I said that, hope you can catch it this time.

I never said "O'Reilly is responsible," strawman. Mmmm'kay?

You're the one bringing other pundits into this, not me. Mmm'kay? WTF does Olbermann have to do with any of this? You "would say the same thing about Olbermann" because you're glib, full of shit, and don't have any answer...

Please feel free to actually compare the language of Olbermann and O'Reilly...

[Big Train]

Fuckface, TRY to listen this time. See if you can be a little less glib yourself. Take the sled down off Tampax mountain and try to hear what is being said.

I'm neither defending O'Reilly nor slandering Olbermann. In fact, in my first post I said if it were Olbermann that this happened "because of" , I wouldn't hang what happened on him either. I would not hang it on any of them. The actions of a random nut are theirs and theirs alone. If O'Reilly had said specifically "murder this person", then you would have a point.

What Olbermann has to do with this (or any other reporter/entertainer whatever you call them) is this. He has similar tactics. This could easily happen to him with a nut watching his show as it could to O'Reilly. Or Maddow. Or Dobbs. Any of them.

I'm not defending O'Reilly because no defense is needed.

[Kristy]

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't laugh at this but I do find it amusing when people start arguing over the characterization of our 24-hour news network leaders. For one they're not news (well not in the traditional sense) and as for being a leader I guess that depends upon what you're own values are when it comes to getting information.

None of them - From MSNBCDEFG-whatever to Fox - deserve much in the way of respect because the continually blur the lines between self-opinion and fact in favors for ratings and self-commercialism. It's no brainier to quickly realize that O'Liely is a tool bought and paid for by the suits at Fox who prop him up every night to bullshit the American conscience into a even more warped distortion then it already has. Slobermann (and his trusty thesaurus) is pretty much the same deal using a "focus group" approach by intermingling his "countdown" (i.e., list) with a pseudo-intellectual diatribe of all that's wrong with the Right. In fact, Slobermann would be an interesting watch if he wasn't so angry, wasn't so...so pissed off with those not smitten with his throwback college professor look (complete with glasses) and self-imposed humor that I guess only he gets.

Point is they cater to their target audience by bludgeoning them with an emotional delivery that goes beyond the boundaries of journalism. If both just stuck with the facts and then actually reported those facts neither would be in the positions they are today; character assassinations, polemical thought, and most of all, partisan inclination fundamentally dominate reason. And what's so sad is this is dirty laundry their audiences buy into. If O'Lielly says a certain doctor in Kansas is a "baby killer" and expresses that with a bile tongue it won't be long before his listeners think as one-dimensionally as his opinion, right? Fuck the understandings for late-term abortion or why they are performed, doesn't matter that the kid has no shot at life or the mother's life in in jeopardy itself or the brutal and disturbing murder of this doctor's life, the bottom line to O'Lielly is that he kills babies and of course that is going to immediately attract the fringe. Now whether or not you can link O'Lielly's surmise with murder remains to be seen but my best guess is that nothing will come out of this.


Oh, as for Maddow, she can fuck right off. To claim anti-abortion activist are akin to terrorist cells if plain ridiculous if not a downright cunting statement to make. You can make for a reasonable argument that is is some over-lapping there in terms of mindset in making of bombs, plans to cause destruction and chaos, a back-ass political cause and a discernible belief in what they are doing comes from God for the process of motivation but Maddow, terrorist will kill anyone in their path from babies to the old in order to gain a foothold anti-abortion nutwhacks are specially concentrating their efforts on one target, not an entire populace. Circumventing the Bush policy on terrorism and changing it to fit your personal beliefs (Tiller was a doctor, not a martyr) on anti-abortionist is not journalism. Because if it is then I suppose all those who posses a dog-eared copy 'Catcher In The Rye' and hear a voice that tells them to put a bullet in one of the two remaining Beatles is also a terrorist under your view. It was quite obvious that the guy who killed this doctor in Kansas was mentally unstable no matter his connection with the fucked-up ilk that is Operation Rescue. Shit, he had to have been to have the balls to ironically kill someone in the walls of church but how boring is that!? But to call him a pawn in a "terrorist organization" is no different than O'Lielly calling Tiller a baby killer.


All of these so-called news talking heads can fuck off for all I care.

[Nickdfresh]

Fuckface, TRY to listen this time. See if you can be a little less glib yourself. Take the sled down off Tampax mountain and try to hear what is being said.

OOoooooh! I love it when you talk dirty! Little bug up our asshole today?


I'm neither defending O'Reilly nor slandering Olbermann. In fact, in my first post I said if it were Olbermann that this happened "because of" , I wouldn't hang what happened on him either. I would not hang it on any of them. The actions of a random nut are theirs and theirs alone. If O'Reilly had said specifically "murder this person", then you would have a point.

Nope. You're just making really retarded points likening Olbermann's cricism of O'Reilly with Bill specifically targeting a guy and accusing him of being a murderer, etc. This only fans the flames of of fucking maniacs just like the Imams who cry "death to America and the West" egg on terrorists and provide a pseudo-ideological/religious justifications...


What Olbermann has to do with this (or any other reporter/entertainer whatever you call them) is this. He has similar tactics. This could easily happen to him with a nut watching his show as it could to O'Reilly. Or Maddow. Or Dobbs. Any of them.

I'm not defending O'Reilly because no defense is needed.

Right. So, which demographic that bombed TV studios or have assassinated pundit-assholes was Kieth pandering too again? Oh wait! I forgot there aren't any. There is a long track record, however, of loser douchebags murdering abortion doctors and bombing clinics in the name of Jeebus...

[LoungeMachine]

Fuckface, TRY to listen this time. .

LMMFAO

I've always found it helpful to begin a post with the term FUCKFACE when I'm trying to get people to listen to my next 4 paragraphs of nonsense. :lmao:

[Big Train]

OOoooooh! I love it when you talk dirty! Little bug up our asshole today?

Keep you come-ons to yourself Nick.

Nope. You're just making really retarded points likening Olbermann's cricism of O'Reilly with Bill specifically targeting a guy and accusing him of being a murderer, etc. This only fans the flames of of fucking maniacs just like the Imams who cry "death to America and the West" egg on terrorists and provide a pseudo-ideological/religious justifications...

They both could provide the same result with a mentally unstable person listening to them, that is the point (for the fourth time now). Calling someone the "worst person in the world" (which I guess your going to somehow claim does not single out people) could very easily trigger a nut to try to straighten out that injustice.

Right. So, which demographic that bombed TV studios or have assassinated pundit-assholes was Kieth pandering too again? Oh wait! I forgot there aren't any. There is a long track record, however, of loser douchebags murdering abortion doctors and bombing clinics in the name of Jeebus...

Yea, there have not been any incidents yet with Keith's crowd or Maddows crowd. As Kristy stated above (very well), it's not as is Maddow is above that fray or that terminology. BUT, if something were to happen, I would not hold any of them responsible. It's the person pulling the trigger alone.

[Big Train]

LMMFAO

I've always found it helpful to begin a post with the term FUCKFACE when I'm trying to get people to listen to my next 4 paragraphs of nonsense. :lmao:

So is liberal use of mmk, strawman etc.. It's our way.

I was giving up hope that Nick can actually read a post and comprehend it.

[FORD]

Yea, there have not been any incidents yet with Keith's crowd or Maddows crowd. As Kristy stated above (very well), it's not as is Maddow is above that fray or that terminology. BUT, if something were to happen, I would not hold any of them responsible. It's the person pulling the trigger alone.

Its possible that Olbermann fans might waterboard Sean Hannity, if given the opportunity, but that's probably about as far as they would go.

[Big Train]

Yea, that crowd is too lazy to actually get up and do anything for themselves. They would attack from the "blogosphere"..

[ODShowtime]

O'Reilly whorishly pandered to his crowd for ratings. Does anyone really believe he gives a fuck about the unborn?


I'd bet anything that O'Reilly has forced at least one mistress to get an abortion. No doubt about it.

[Kristy]

I'd bet anything that O'Reilly has forced at least one mistress to get an abortion. No doubt about it.

:hee:I wouldn't put it past O'Lielly tha the has paid a $300-$400/hr to a woman who'd tie him up, beat and humiliate all of his unresolved mother issues out of him. When I see him on camera with the female species he comes off as being far too passive/aggressive. In other words, he seems to me to be submissive of women yet wants to top them at the same time with either intellectual arguments or raising his voice when he feels threatened, but then again, he does that with everybody.

Chances are he's more into having his junk chastised then ever having to pay to use it. :barf:

[Nickdfresh]

Keep you come-ons to yourself Nick.

No! No I won't come on myself! :019::uck:



They both could provide the same result with a mentally unstable person listening to them, that is the point (for the fourth time now). Calling someone the "worst person in the world" (which I guess your going to somehow claim does not single out people) could very easily trigger a nut to try to straighten out that injustice.

With Olbermann never actually (as far as I know, since again I watch neither Maddow or Olbermann) uses the inflammatory language demonizing someone to the point that they become diabolical subhumans worthy of execution in the minds of the crazies...

The proof is in the pudding on that one, since Ive yet to hear of anyone stalking and attacking O'Reilly, yet I'm pretty sure there is a long list of terrorist activities conducted against abortion providers...


Yea, there have not been any incidents yet with Keith's crowd or Maddows crowd. As Kristy stated above (very well), it's not as is Maddow is above that fray or that terminology. BUT, if something were to happen, I would not hold any of them responsible. It's the person pulling the trigger alone.

I don't know Maddow's "terminology." But I don't think Kristy's point was exactly the one your projecting on to it...

But, let me get this straight. Are you saying that conceivably Charles Manson is innocent? After all, he didn't actually stab Sharon Tate to death and the other victims who were murdered by his cult...

To clarify, I am not saying nor implying that O'Reilly is on par with Charles Manson. But, if we were to take your comments literally, then Charles Manson wouldn't be actually guilty in your little world. There is in fact a whole legal doctrine mostly applied to the military and political leaders called "command responsibility" that actually states that commanders are even more guilty of the crimes of their soldiers if they allow it to go unpunished or investigated even of they didn't directly order nor participate in the atrocities. While I realize that O'Douchebag isn't a military commander, I am sort of addressing the spirit of the law...

[Nickdfresh]

So is liberal use of mmk, strawman etc.. It's our way.

I was giving up hope that Nick can actually read a post and comprehend it.


"Comprehend" or agree? I think you have the two confused...

[FORD]

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/06/09/tomo/story.jpg

[Big Train]

With Olbermann never actually (as far as I know, since again I watch neither Maddow or Olbermann) uses the inflammatory language demonizing someone to the point that they become diabolical subhumans worthy of execution in the minds of the crazies...

Calling someone every night of the week the "worst person in the world" pretty much says that.

But, let me get this straight. Are you saying that conceivably Charles Manson is innocent? After all, he didn't actually stab Sharon Tate to death and the other victims who were murdered by his cult...

To clarify, I am not saying nor implying that O'Reilly is on par with Charles Manson. But, if we were to take your comments literally, then Charles Manson wouldn't be actually guilty in your little world. There is in fact a whole legal doctrine mostly applied to the military and political leaders called "command responsibility" that actually states that commanders are even more guilty of the crimes of their soldiers if they allow it to go unpunished or investigated even of they didn't directly order nor participate in the atrocities. While I realize that O'Douchebag isn't a military commander, I am sort of addressing the spirit of the law...

Ok, let's get it straight.

In my "little world", there is a major distinction to be made. Yet again, I've covered this in previous posts in this thread. Manson's followers did things at his specific request following a doctrine of violence for a specific outcome. O'Reilly disagreed with the Dr. strongly, but he never advocated violence against anyone or even hinted at that. Much less did he have a larger overall theme or plan. Prove to me that O'Reilly said "go kill this guy" literally or even suggested it. In my little world, that would be guilt, but I have yet to see any evidence of that.

[GAR]

After forcing myself to watch Oreilly for awhile, so I know what all this shit is about, Ive seen him comment that he's quoted others as saying Tiller the Killer.

post a youtube clip of Oreilly saying it directly or STFU.

In the real world, none of it matters since Oreilly is in the same vein as Maddow who is just a pure slanderer. At least Oreilly lets the opposing view speak at length, you never see that on MSNBC

BTW they're both channels controlled and bought off so who gives a shit what either say in commentary, the story is the story.

[standin]

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't laugh at this but I do find it amusing when people start arguing over the characterization of our 24-hour news network leaders. For one they're not news (well not in the traditional sense) and as for being a leader I guess that depends upon what you're own values are when it comes to getting information.

None of them - From MSNBCDEFG-whatever to Fox - deserve much in the way of respect because the continually blur the lines between self-opinion and fact in favors for ratings and self-commercialism. It's no brainier to quickly realize that O'Liely is a tool bought and paid for by the suits at Fox who prop him up every night to bullshit the American conscience into a even more warped distortion then it already has. Slobermann (and his trusty thesaurus) is pretty much the same deal using a "focus group" approach by intermingling his "countdown" (i.e., list) with a pseudo-intellectual diatribe of all that's wrong with the Right. In fact, Slobermann would be an interesting watch if he wasn't so angry, wasn't so...so pissed off with those not smitten with his throwback college professor look (complete with glasses) and self-imposed humor that I guess only he gets.

Point is they cater to their target audience by bludgeoning them with an emotional delivery that goes beyond the boundaries of journalism. If both just stuck with the facts and then actually reported those facts neither would be in the positions they are today; character assassinations, polemical thought, and most of all, partisan inclination fundamentally dominate reason. And what's so sad is this is dirty laundry their audiences buy into. If O'Lielly says a certain doctor in Kansas is a "baby killer" and expresses that with a bile tongue it won't be long before his listeners think as one-dimensionally as his opinion, right? Fuck the understandings for late-term abortion or why they are performed, doesn't matter that the kid has no shot at life or the mother's life in in jeopardy itself or the brutal and disturbing murder of this doctor's life, the bottom line to O'Lielly is that he kills babies and of course that is going to immediately attract the fringe. Now whether or not you can link O'Lielly's surmise with murder remains to be seen but my best guess is that nothing will come out of this.


Oh, as for Maddow, she can fuck right off. To claim anti-abortion activist are akin to terrorist cells if plain ridiculous if not a downright cunting statement to make. You can make for a reasonable argument that is is some over-lapping there in terms of mindset in making of bombs, plans to cause destruction and chaos, a back-ass political cause and a discernible belief in what they are doing comes from God for the process of motivation but Maddow, terrorist will kill anyone in their path from babies to the old in order to gain a foothold anti-abortion nutwhacks are specially concentrating their efforts on one target, not an entire populace. Circumventing the Bush policy on terrorism and changing it to fit your personal beliefs (Tiller was a doctor, not a martyr) on anti-abortionist is not journalism. Because if it is then I suppose all those who posses a dog-eared copy 'Catcher In The Rye' and hear a voice that tells them to put a bullet in one of the two remaining Beatles is also a terrorist under your view. It was quite obvious that the guy who killed this doctor in Kansas was mentally unstable no matter his connection with the fucked-up ilk that is Operation Rescue. Shit, he had to have been to have the balls to ironically kill someone in the walls of church but how boring is that!? But to call him a pawn in a "terrorist organization" is no different than O'Lielly calling Tiller a baby killer.


All of these so-called news talking heads can fuck off for all I care.

I suppose you typed this in anger, and many points are valid.
Nevertheless, one thing that distressed me, when I first read it was....
Are you saying because groups are ___________and ________, they do not and cannot harbor terrorist tendency and factions?

Does having “The Turner Diaries” dog-eared and underlined make one more questionable as opposed to “The Catcher in the Rye”? Even if teaching against?

I grab what you are saying. In addition, I, too, am very sensitive to and concerned with the extent of responsibility when a person or persons misconstrue mentoring, guidance, assistance, and leadership.

[binnie]

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't laugh at this but I do find it amusing when people start arguing over the characterization of our 24-hour news network leaders. For one they're not news (well not in the traditional sense) and as for being a leader I guess that depends upon what you're own values are when it comes to getting information.

None of them - From MSNBCDEFG-whatever to Fox - deserve much in the way of respect because the continually blur the lines between self-opinion and fact in favors for ratings and self-commercialism. It's no brainier to quickly realize that O'Liely is a tool bought and paid for by the suits at Fox who prop him up every night to bullshit the American conscience into a even more warped distortion then it already has. Slobermann (and his trusty thesaurus) is pretty much the same deal using a "focus group" approach by intermingling his "countdown" (i.e., list) with a pseudo-intellectual diatribe of all that's wrong with the Right. In fact, Slobermann would be an interesting watch if he wasn't so angry, wasn't so...so pissed off with those not smitten with his throwback college professor look (complete with glasses) and self-imposed humor that I guess only he gets.

Point is they cater to their target audience by bludgeoning them with an emotional delivery that goes beyond the boundaries of journalism. If both just stuck with the facts and then actually reported those facts neither would be in the positions they are today; character assassinations, polemical thought, and most of all, partisan inclination fundamentally dominate reason. And what's so sad is this is dirty laundry their audiences buy into. If O'Lielly says a certain doctor in Kansas is a "baby killer" and expresses that with a bile tongue it won't be long before his listeners think as one-dimensionally as his opinion, right? Fuck the understandings for late-term abortion or why they are performed, doesn't matter that the kid has no shot at life or the mother's life in in jeopardy itself or the brutal and disturbing murder of this doctor's life, the bottom line to O'Lielly is that he kills babies and of course that is going to immediately attract the fringe. Now whether or not you can link O'Lielly's surmise with murder remains to be seen but my best guess is that nothing will come out of this.


Oh, as for Maddow, she can fuck right off. To claim anti-abortion activist are akin to terrorist cells if plain ridiculous if not a downright cunting statement to make. You can make for a reasonable argument that is is some over-lapping there in terms of mindset in making of bombs, plans to cause destruction and chaos, a back-ass political cause and a discernible belief in what they are doing comes from God for the process of motivation but Maddow, terrorist will kill anyone in their path from babies to the old in order to gain a foothold anti-abortion nutwhacks are specially concentrating their efforts on one target, not an entire populace. Circumventing the Bush policy on terrorism and changing it to fit your personal beliefs (Tiller was a doctor, not a martyr) on anti-abortionist is not journalism. Because if it is then I suppose all those who posses a dog-eared copy 'Catcher In The Rye' and hear a voice that tells them to put a bullet in one of the two remaining Beatles is also a terrorist under your view. It was quite obvious that the guy who killed this doctor in Kansas was mentally unstable no matter his connection with the fucked-up ilk that is Operation Rescue. Shit, he had to have been to have the balls to ironically kill someone in the walls of church but how boring is that!? But to call him a pawn in a "terrorist organization" is no different than O'Lielly calling Tiller a baby killer.


All of these so-called news talking heads can fuck off for all I care.

Outstanding.

You are quickly becoming the most thought-provoking poster on this board.

[Kristy]

I suppose you typed this in anger, and many points are valid.
Nevertheless, one thing that distressed me, when I first read it was....
Are you saying because groups are ___________and ________, they do not and cannot harbor terrorist tendency and factions?

Does having “The Turner Diaries” dog-eared and underlined make one more questionable as opposed to “The Catcher in the Rye”? Even if teaching against?

I grab what you are saying. In addition, I, too, am very sensitive to and concerned with the extent of responsibility when a person or persons misconstrue mentoring, guidance, assistance, and leadership.

Not sure if I follow you, your questions are a bit vague. None of that was typed out in anger as much as it was in frustration. I was speaking more of our 24/he cable news machines coverage than the actual murder itself. Much of what's going on in these networks hardly can be qualified as news anymore. Sure they report the story but always with a biased catch. I can't help but feel that when watching either FOX, MSNMSG or (gasp!) CNN that I'm some kid locked into some ugly custody battle with this whole "did you hear what she/he said" mentality rather than just the facts.

When the story broke of Tiller's murder by (alleged) killer Scott Roeder I first heard of it on BBC News who, as the limeys often do in their brilliant coverage, gave out the facts deadpan of what took place; no outside quips or finger pointing of another news organization, no indirect or covert mentions of a terrorist group, no ridiculous drama...just what took place in that Lutheran church.

I mentioned Maddow because no one puffed up this story like she did bending and twisting it into some sort histrionic shitfest by singling out ever act Roeder ever did both within Operation Rescue and on his own. For example, she actually did her best to make Roeder into some sort of terrorist monster when she "researched" (more like college interns at MSNGHXC did the footwork) the time Roeder glued the doors shut of Tiller's abortion clinic. Tried as I might, I don't see that as an terrorist act as much as it was someone being an asshole. In no way am I defending Roeder (are you kidding) but let's not distort truth with self-imposed fiction here. Roeder was arrested for murder, not terrorism.

And this is what is happening in our news - any tedious tidbit of information is enlarged and over-hyped for ratings to where that becomes more important than the story itself. Correct if I'm wrong but it was either Hitler or most likely Goebbels who stated "intellectualism is a danger to the building of one's character" for it appears (at least to me) that the pinheads at FOX et. al are the ones doing all the thinking for you with their bland aforementioned monikers like "Countdown", "Hannity's America", "Factor" whatever in order to disengage your own thought in put into place their own, selling the drama hook and slogan. They're all guilty of this warped media mindset of having you believe in that what they tell you or you're just not on their side. Of course, no one is better at this then FOX with their whole "We report, you decide" which really means "We distort, you obey" but I hope you get the picture.

Not trying to end this with a cliche but Tiller's murder was a senseless tragedy allegedly done by a man who obviously had many pieces of his own life not all put together which to me hardly make him out to be a terrorist in the truest sense. Maddow is just as retarded as O'Lielly when it comes to the name game making Roeder out to be an enemy of the state simply by proxy with those whom have been known to engage in terrorist behavior. It was his finger alone on the trigger.

[GAR]

I don't think either Oreilly nor Maddow do their own research, but Oreilly appears to be rarely hitched to the teleprompter and consistently going off of his recollections and his written notes.. so I'd tend to believe he at least reviews and chooses the research collected before the show goes on.

I don't think you could say the same convictions about Rachel Maddow, her show is about namecalling the same as that crypussy Olberman. All that douche does is BITCH!

[FORD]

Rachel Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar. Loofa O'Reilly is a Catholic school dropout who got his start on a shitty tabloid TV show.

[GAR]

Proves money can't buy class always.. Oreilly's show is number one and Maddow's - is it even in the top 20?

[Nickdfresh]

After forcing myself to watch Oreilly for awhile, so I know what all this shit is about...

If this is actually true, then you are a bigger douchebag than I thought. And I've always thought you a massive douchebag. :)

Secondly, there are multiple quotes of O'Reilly's inflammatory statements referring to a private citizen abortion doctor as a "babykiller."


In the real world, none of it matters since Oreilly is in the same vein as Maddow who is just a pure slanderer. At least Oreilly lets the opposing view speak at length, you never see that on MSNBC

BTW they're both channels controlled and bought off so who gives a shit what either say in commentary, the story is the story.

Cliche. Cliche. Cliche....

[LoungeMachine]

Not sure if I follow you, .

Welcome to our world...

:gulp:

[Nickdfresh]

Ok, let's get it straight.

"Worst person in the world" (an almost childlike temper tantrum comment) correlates to "babykiller!" "Murder!" Are you this fucking weak? Really? Riiiigggghhhhttt!


In my "little world", there is a major distinction to be made. Yet again, I've covered this in previous posts in this thread. Manson's followers did things at his specific request following a doctrine of violence for a specific outcome.

Well gee. Dr. Tiller had been shot twice before and his clinic violently attacked repeated. Golly, however could highlighting where he lived and practiced ever could have made him a target for those retarded terrorist assholes on the fringe of the "Pro-Life" movement (such as the Army of God)?

O'Reilly didn't start the fire, but he clearly was throwing heaps of gasoline on it in order to pander to his base and preach the conservative gospel the Republican hierarchy's practice of pretending to want to end abortion (which is one of the last things in the world they actually want) in order to continue to defraud the fundamentalist and conservative religious vote on some pseudo-moralist crap...


O'Reilly disagreed with the Dr. strongly,

"Disagree with (him) strongly?" My you have a gift for understatement. But yes, repeated references to him as a murdering babykiller might indicate a hint of discord...


...but he never advocated violence against anyone or even hinted at that.

Of course not. He just fanned the flames and repeated referenced the guy so some psychotic loser, who seemed to hate his own wife and children, could go murder him and save the fetuses...


...Much less did he have a larger overall theme or plan.

Of course not. Just like radical Middle Eastern Imams who preach "death to America/Europe/Israel" also may not be "read-on-to" terrorist operations such as 9/11. But they certainly contribute towards what is in the end philosophically justifying and rationalizing atrocities and violence based on a completely irrational, highly emotionally charged discourse designed to dehumanize and subsume their perceived enemies....


Prove to me that O'Reilly said "go kill this guy" literally or even suggested it.

Why would I have to "prove" that to you oh thick one? That was never my point.


...In my little world, that would be guilt, but I have yet to see any evidence of that.

I never suggested "guilt" of the murder. Just the wider defamatory culpability of demonization that helps the Lee Harvey Oswalds of the world come out of the woodwork and find targets direct their personal anger and failure at others and give a perverse meaning to their stupid lives...

Bill O'Reailly is an irresponsible demagogue that fans the flames of sectarian and partisan hatred based on irrational strawman arguments of the ubiquitous "liberal left" whose positions they so distort...

[Nickdfresh]

Proves money can't buy class always.. Oreilly's show is number one and Maddow's - is it even in the top 20?

But it can buy you a computer and an internet connection...;)

Did you finally steal ur jobz back from the Mexicans?

[standin]

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't laugh at this but I do find it amusing when people start arguing over the characterization of our 24-hour news network leaders. For one they're not news (well not in the traditional sense) and as for being a leader I guess that depends upon what you're own values are when it comes to getting information.

None of them - From MSNBCDEFG-whatever to Fox - deserve much in the way of respect because the continually blur the lines between self-opinion and fact in favors for ratings and self-commercialism. It's no brainier to quickly realize that O'Liely is a tool bought and paid for by the suits at Fox who prop him up every night to bullshit the American conscience into a even more warped distortion then it already has. Slobermann (and his trusty thesaurus) is pretty much the same deal using a "focus group" approach by intermingling his "countdown" (i.e., list) with a pseudo-intellectual diatribe of all that's wrong with the Right. In fact, Slobermann would be an interesting watch if he wasn't so angry, wasn't so...so pissed off with those not smitten with his throwback college professor look (complete with glasses) and self-imposed humor that I guess only he gets.

Point is they cater to their target audience by bludgeoning them with an emotional delivery that goes beyond the boundaries of journalism. If both just stuck with the facts and then actually reported those facts neither would be in the positions they are today; character assassinations, polemical thought, and most of all, partisan inclination fundamentally dominate reason. And what's so sad is this is dirty laundry their audiences buy into. If O'Lielly says a certain doctor in Kansas is a "baby killer" and expresses that with a bile tongue it won't be long before his listeners think as one-dimensionally as his opinion, right? Fuck the understandings for late-term abortion or why they are performed, doesn't matter that the kid has no shot at life or the mother's life in in jeopardy itself or the brutal and disturbing murder of this doctor's life, the bottom line to O'Lielly is that he kills babies and of course that is going to immediately attract the fringe. Now whether or not you can link O'Lielly's surmise with murder remains to be seen but my best guess is that nothing will come out of this.


Oh, as for Maddow, she can fuck right off. To claim anti-abortion activist are akin to terrorist cells if plain ridiculous if not a downright cunting statement to make. You can make for a reasonable argument that is is some over-lapping there in terms of mindset in making of bombs, plans to cause destruction and chaos, a back-ass political cause and a discernible belief in what they are doing comes from God for the process of motivation but Maddow, terrorist will kill anyone in their path from babies to the old in order to gain a foothold anti-abortion nutwhacks are specially concentrating their efforts on one target, not an entire populace. Circumventing the Bush policy on terrorism and changing it to fit your personal beliefs (Tiller was a doctor, not a martyr) on anti-abortionist is not journalism. Because if it is then I suppose all those who posses a dog-eared copy 'Catcher In The Rye' and hear a voice that tells them to put a bullet in one of the two remaining Beatles is also a terrorist under your view. It was quite obvious that the guy who killed this doctor in Kansas was mentally unstable no matter his connection with the fucked-up ilk that is Operation Rescue. Shit, he had to have been to have the balls to ironically kill someone in the walls of church but how boring is that!? But to call him a pawn in a "terrorist organization" is no different than O'Lielly calling Tiller a baby killer.


All of these so-called news talking heads can fuck off for all I care.


I suppose you typed this in anger, and many points are valid.
Nevertheless, one thing that distressed me, when I first read it was....
Are you saying because groups are ___________and ________, they do not and cannot harbor terrorist tendency and factions?

Does having “The Turner Diaries” dog-eared and underlined make one more questionable as opposed to “The Catcher in the Rye”? Even if teaching against?

I grab what you are saying. In addition, I, too, am very sensitive to and concerned with the extent of responsibility when a person or persons misconstrue mentoring, guidance, assistance, and leadership.


Not sure if I follow you, your questions are a bit vague. None of that was typed out in anger as much as it was in frustration. I was speaking more of our 24/he cable news machines coverage than the actual murder itself. Much of what's going on in these networks hardly can be qualified as news anymore. Sure they report the story but always with a biased catch. I can't help but feel that when watching either FOX, MSNMSG or (gasp!) CNN that I'm some kid locked into some ugly custody battle with this whole "did you hear what she/he said" mentality rather than just the facts.

When the story broke of Tiller's murder by (alleged) killer Scott Roeder I first heard of it on BBC News who, as the limeys often do in their brilliant coverage, gave out the facts deadpan of what took place; no outside quips or finger pointing of another news organization, no indirect or covert mentions of a terrorist group, no ridiculous drama...just what took place in that Lutheran church.

I mentioned Maddow because no one puffed up this story like she did bending and twisting it into some sort histrionic shitfest by singling out ever act Roeder ever did both within Operation Rescue and on his own. For example, she actually did her best to make Roeder into some sort of terrorist monster when she "researched" (more like college interns at MSNGHXC did the footwork) the time Roeder glued the doors shut of Tiller's abortion clinic. Tried as I might, I don't see that as an terrorist act as much as it was someone being an asshole. In no way am I defending Roeder (are you kidding) but let's not distort truth with self-imposed fiction here. Roeder was arrested for murder, not terrorism.

And this is what is happening in our news - any tedious tidbit of information is enlarged and over-hyped for ratings to where that becomes more important than the story itself. Correct if I'm wrong but it was either Hitler or most likely Goebbels who stated "intellectualism is a danger to the building of one's character" for it appears (at least to me) that the pinheads at FOX et. al are the ones doing all the thinking for you with their bland aforementioned monikers like "Countdown", "Hannity's America", "Factor" whatever in order to disengage your own thought in put into place their own, selling the drama hook and slogan. They're all guilty of this warped media mindset of having you believe in that what they tell you or you're just not on their side. Of course, no one is better at this then FOX with their whole "We report, you decide" which really means "We distort, you obey" but I hope you get the picture.

Not trying to end this with a cliche but Tiller's murder was a senseless tragedy allegedly done by a man who obviously had many pieces of his own life not all put together which to me hardly make him out to be a terrorist in the truest sense. Maddow is just as retarded as O'Lielly when it comes to the name game making Roeder out to be an enemy of the state simply by proxy with those whom have been known to engage in terrorist behavior. It was his finger alone on the trigger.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, as for Maddow, she can fuck right off. To claim anti-abortion activist are akin to terrorist cells if plain ridiculous if not a downright cunting statement to make. You can make for a reasonable argument that is is some over-lapping there in terms of mindset in making of bombs, plans to cause destruction and chaos, a back-ass political cause and a discernible belief in what they are doing comes from God for the process of motivation but Maddow, terrorist will kill anyone in their path from babies to the old in order to gain a foothold anti-abortion nutwhacks are specially concentrating their efforts on one target, not an entire populace. Circumventing the Bush policy on terrorism and changing it to fit your personal beliefs (Tiller was a doctor, not a martyr) on anti-abortionist is not journalism. Because if it is then I suppose all those who posses a dog-eared copy 'Catcher In The Rye' and hear a voice that tells them to put a bullet in one of the two remaining Beatles is also a terrorist under your view. It was quite obvious that the guy who killed this doctor in Kansas was mentally unstable no matter his connection with the fucked-up ilk that is Operation Rescue. Shit, he had to have been to have the balls to ironically kill someone in the walls of church but how boring is that!? But to call him a pawn in a "terrorist organization" is no different than O'Lielly calling Tiller a baby killer.

Specifically, I was in reference to the paragraph above. I did not want to analyze your wording or nitpick it. That is why I respectfully pointed out the reference to the Turner Diaries and Timothy. I was hoping you would catch the reference and reflect back to Eric and his campaigns. I have no clue of Maddow is. I did not see her show. Nevertheless, from what you told, she is correct about groups actively planning terroristic activities.
I have no desire to provide link backs to the various organizational places. During the patriot act first years, a number of politically and philosophically motivated groups disorganized and openly stated so and told their group to maintain loose cells or even better lone wolf status. Maddow was generous to call him a pawn. He would actually be classified as a lone wolf. He is but one example of persons that decide to cross the line. The Virginia Tech massacre was not labeled an act of terrorism, but that is very much what it was. The fact is there are persons with agendas. In addition, not all of them are politicians or on primetime. Moreover, often these persons with agendas realize that motivating others (indirectly, influentially, or directly) will provide a broader scope and range of tactic. Not every terrorist is a Theodore, and even Theodore was not labeled a terrorist.
The pure definition of terrorism is to use fear for a purpose. The use of violence for political purpose is terrorism. You will find persons that say, “Oh, Terrorism is hard define.”, but that is only because they themselves find it difficult to accept the common use of terrorism.
From the small “masturbate and you will go blind” to the act of war.
I am by no means a pacifist, but I also do not skip-to-my-Loo to war.

[FORD]

Scott Roeder is a terrorist. And now another terrorist just shot up the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC. And according to Thom Hartmann, this piece of shit is not only a White Supremacist wackjob, but one of those fools who think Obama was "born in Kenya".

Saddam Hussein or Mo Ahmadinnerjacket were never threats to this country. Fools like Scott Roeder, and this cockknocker at the Holocaust museum ARE.

[Kristy]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nevertheless, from what you told, she is correct about groups actively planning terroristic activities.

Is "terroristic" even a word? No, in her report that night of Tiller's murder she lumped everyone in Operation Rescue as terrorist or a terrorist cell. Really? Does Maddow even know everyone in Operation Rescue? Granted, Operation Rescue has been federally investigated, members arrested and case documents leveled against them for obvious terrorist - or, more specifically, terrorist-like behavior but it's asinine to clump all anti-abortionist as terrorist which was what she was hinting at; many a anti-abortionist has never lowered themselves to the point of violence and instead opted for more peaceful and alternative solutions to a woman considering an abortion.

Maddow circled her own wagon due to the actions of one man who may or may have not been influenced by even more whackfarts in Operation Rescue. That was a grand assumption. It will be up to the prosecutors in Roeder's trial to uncover if anyone in Operation Rescue actually had a hand in Tiller's murder to punish them accordingly as being an accessory. Maddow, in her usual dramatized emotional tone concluded that everyone who associated with Roeder was not only just as guilty of being a terrorist due Roeder's actions alone. That's piss-poor journalism and Maddow is an asshole for believing so.

I have nothing against her personally, for she is a well thought out, highly educated articulate woman who should above the fray to hastily judge those who do not side with her pro-life views. Being raised Catholic myself I'm pro-life but in no way do I think abortion is means to an end for a woman's unwanted pregnancy when there are other alternatives available or that every anti-abortionist is a "terrorist" idiot building a bomb in their basement simply because they see abortion as murder in God's eyes. Most whom I've argued with on the subject retain a lot of anger but never once have the ones I've come across ever thought or brought up the idea of killing abortion workers or burning down their clinic. So the fuck with Maddow and her whole broad-brush ideology. She should know better.

[Nickdfresh]

Is "terroristic" even a word?...

Yes. Yes it is...

[Big Train]

"Worst person in the world" (an almost childlike temper tantrum comment) correlates to "babykiller!" "Murder!" Are you this fucking weak? Really? Riiiigggghhhhttt!

In the eyes of a nut, yes it does. That is the point.

Well gee. Dr. Tiller had been shot twice before and his clinic violently attacked repeated. Golly, however could highlighting where he lived and practiced ever could have made him a target for those retarded terrorist assholes on the fringe of the "Pro-Life" movement (such as the Army of God)?

O'Reilly didn't start the fire, but he clearly was throwing heaps of gasoline on it in order to pander to his base and preach the conservative gospel the Republican hierarchy's practice of pretending to want to end abortion (which is one of the last things in the world they actually want) in order to continue to defraud the fundamentalist and conservative religious vote on some pseudo-moralist crap...



"Disagree with (him) strongly?" My you have a gift for understatement. But yes, repeated references to him as a murdering babykiller might indicate a hint of discord...



Of course not. He just fanned the flames and repeated referenced the guy so some psychotic loser, who seemed to hate his own wife and children, could go murder him and save the fetuses...

Right, but you play down others who do the same thing as "childlike rants".

Of course not. Just like radical Middle Eastern Imams who preach "death to America/Europe/Israel" also may not be "read-on-to" terrorist operations such as 9/11. But they certainly contribute towards what is in the end philosophically justifying and rationalizing atrocities and violence based on a completely irrational, highly emotionally charged discourse designed to dehumanize and subsume their perceived enemies....

Again, exactly and specifically, where did he say ANYTHING comparable to "death to America".


Why would I have to "prove" that to you oh thick one? That was never my point.

Because you don't have one. This is an emotional argument about someone you don't like.

I never suggested "guilt" of the murder. Just the wider defamatory culpability of demonization.

There is no culpability. That would not stand up in the court of law and you know it.

As you can only see Bill O'Reilly as the only guy who is guilty of this, this is an emotional argument that is intellectually dishonest at best.

[Nickdfresh]

There is no culpability. That would not stand up in the court of law and you know it.

As you can only see Bill O'Reilly as the only guy who is guilty of this, this is an emotional argument that is intellectually dishonest at best.


Oh, fucking irony be damned!! I'm the "emotional one?" Again, you're the strawman spouting idiot as, and let me repeat thicko (for about the third time now): I never said O'Reilly should stand trial as an accessory to murder, so of course it would never stand up in court...

But he was culpable is the sense that he defamed the Doctor and inflamed hatred and specifically targeted him for harassment for doing his job. I think that may very well stand up in a civil court...

...................

[jhale667]

But he was culpable is the sense that he defamed the Doctor and inflamed hatred and specifically targeted him for harassment for doing his job. I think that may very well stand up in a civil court...


It may very well. Especially if they show the clips of Bill saying things like "something should be done" and - this is a direct quote I personally saw on a news story discussing this very topic the other night:

"If I could get my hands on this guy...well, you know." :mad:

Certainly implied he'd LIKE it if the guy was murdered...and hoped some nutjob would do it for him.

And not to go off topic, but Operation Rescue trying to BUY Tiller's clinic in order to make it - and this should have to be spoken in your best, most pretentious fucking Micheal Jackson voice - "a monument to the children"....fucking despicable...:barf:

[kwame k]

You have got to be kidding me, Jay. A monument to the children. How about taking that money and feeding some staving kids in this country.

[FORD]

Randall Terry couldn't care less about children after they're born. Including his own. Disowned his son for being gay, and his daughter for - belieive it or not - having a baby out of wedlock.

Can't win with that asshole.... kill the kid, keep the kid, be gay so you can't have kids.... doesn't matter with Randall Terrorist.

[jhale667]

Randall Terry couldn't care less about children after they're born.

Exactly.
Same with most hardcore "Pro-lifers" -which makes the very term itself a misnomer.
And even more idiotically, they're also usually completely against contraception, so really (and some even admit) they also want to control when people can have sex, too...for the purpose of procreation only. Fucking weirdos.