Olbermann fillets O’Reilly yet again
I recently got into a somewhat heated argument with a conservative friend of mine about Fox News and whether it was more or less misleading than the other mainstream media outlets. I pointed to the two or three Pew polls that show that Fox News viewers on average were the least likely of all the major news outlets to have a clear understanding of the facts. I argued that MSNBC may on the whole be liberal, but at least they “deal in facts” (i.e. they cite their sources and don’t just make stuff up as they go along, like Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity do). The following video is a great example. Bill O’Reilly attempts to debunk Obama’s assertion that Winston Churchill was anti-torture, even when he was under the most dire of circumstances. Notice how O’Reilly makes statements as if they were fact, with no supporting documentation, and how he distracts his audience by going on tangents that have nothing to do with the torture question. Then watch as Olbermann counters Bill O’s argument with facts and actually cites his sources.
It’s amazing to me that anyone still believes that Fox News is “fair and balanced.” What’s even more amazing is that the same conservative friend watched the documentary “Outfoxed” on my suggestion and agreed with much of what it had to say. Three or four years later, now that Obama is in the White House, that objectivity has vanished.
Don’t bother reconciling the two…it’s impossible.
Posted in: Democrats, Media, Politics, Republicans, Video, War on Terror
Tags: Bill O'Reilly, Fox News, Fox News misleading, Keith Olbermann, MSNBC, Sean Hannity
You seem to get into a lot of heated arguments with your conservative friends!
This blownuts never sites his drivel when he throws out accusations, but it doesn’t matter because no one watches this idiot.
On top of that, I’d like some verification on what this numbnuts cited “facts” are– MSNBC, and Olberjoke have no credibility, and even in his point by point rebuttal, some could interpret Churchill DID consider harsh treatment of enemies.
The argument on waterboarding being “torture” is a bit vague. But sleep deprivation? Discomfort from heat or cold? Forced Nudity? None of those compare to whatever gas Churchill considered in WWII.
Obama has, without doubt, compromised our security, to say nothing of our financial stability- but I know, It’s all Bush’s fault.
Obama is worse than I’ve ever imagined- he makes me long for Bill Clinton as the MUCH lesser of 2 evils. Hillary even looks good at this point.
Obama is a disgrace.
Um, what other “heated arguments” are you referring to?
As for the notion that the argument that waterboarding is torture being “a bit vague,” I’ll let the 2008 GOP Presidential candidate speak to the subject:
On November 29, 2007, Sen. McCain, while campaigning in St. Petersburg, Florida, said, “Following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding.”
Sen. McCain was right and the National Review Online is wrong. Politifact, the St. Petersburg Times’ truth-testing project (which this week was awarded a Pulitzer Prize), scrutinized Sen. McCain’s statement and found it to be true. Here’s the money quote from Politifact:
“McCain is referencing the Tokyo Trials, officially known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as ‘water cure,’ ‘water torture’ and ‘waterboarding,’ according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning.” Politifact went on to report, “A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps.”
The heated arguments quote is an inside, personal thing!
…But, to your point about the “2008 GOP candidate,” if you’ll recall, he got trounced. When I voted for him I had to do so while holding my nose and looking the other way.
In retrospect I’m glad he lost, he would have been Obama lite, now we can blame all the garbage that’s about to come down the pike on our liberal executive office and liberal congress.
Hopefully, after that, the tide will turn.
Whether McCain won or lost doesn’t matter, as it doesn’t change the fact that during the Tokyo Trials, we prosecuted enemy soldiers for waterboarding. We considered it torture then, and have for the last 100 years — what’s changed?
The real question is do you or your conservative cohorts believe that waterboarding is a valid interrogation technique when a U.S. soldier is the one being waterboarded?
If there is significant evidence that a terrorist or any other enemy has information that will save hundreds or thousands of American lives, I don’t consider “water boarding” torture if it results in the prevention of some type of horrible calamity. If, on the other hand, we “water board” out of revenge or as a matter of evil (as our enemies would do us) I’d consider that torture.
If a team of medical personnel are on hand to monitor what’s going on, it’s hardly torture.
Lets ask Pelosi….. (another disgrace and a complete moron).
So if the tables are turned, and our enemies are trying to get information from one of our soldiers, saying that they’re simply trying to save the lives of their citizens, then their waterboarding is justified?
I think as a nation we’re better than this, and by torturing our captives we’re giving the terrorists out there fuel for recruitment. A terrorist interrogator who worked in Iraq said that Gitmo and Abu Ghraib (too tired to spell check) were the #1 and #2 recruiting tools for Al-Qaeda. I forget his name, but I’m sure you could look him up.
It doesn’t matter if there’s a medical team nearby. If the subject is in fear for his life, it’s torture. Waterboarding simulates drowning, so it certainly falls under the Merriam-Webster definition:
1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain
2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
Terrorists will do what they want with our soldiers regardless of our actions–Have we ever cut the heads off our enemies and posted the vedeo on the internet? The soldier torture argument is silly when dealing with the monsters we are dealing with.
As far a “recruitment tool,” infants are taught to view us as satan from the time they are born. I don’t think there is much arm twisting for them to get their brothers to join their terrorist organizations
Paulsen, I hope you and your relatives are victims of a terrorist attack because little Ahmed wasn’t “tortured” with water. You are such a fool.
Paulsen, I really don’t want you or your relatives to be victims of a terrorist attack, but sometimes I think nitwits such as yourself need to be saved from…yourself.
Tom – Funny how I pose a few questions and you resort to calling me names and wishing my family harm. It seems that you watch shows like “24″ and believe that they’re real, that Jack Bauer can put the screws to a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer and instantly get good, credible information. That’s not how things work in the real world. Most experts say that torture consistently yields bad information. The prisoner says anything to get the pain to stop. The torture apologists love to throw out this doomsday scenario, but Cheney and Co. have not produced a single instance where waterboarding has yielded good pertinent information about a terrorist attack. In fact, the captives were providing more information before they were waterboarded, and once the CIA started those “enhanced interrogation techniques,” they clammed up. One guy was waterboarded 184 times — obviously, it wasn’t working if they had to do it that many times. Call me a fool/nitwit if you like, but I think I’ll take my IQ over yours any day.
Nick — Forget that they’re terrorists for a second. Say it’s a regular, good old fashioned war — do you think it’s okay for U.S. soldiers to be waterboarded by our enemy?
As for the recruitment angle, I’ll take the word of the guy who actually interrogated prisoners over in Iraq over the opinion of some guy on the internet. Whether or not they are taught to hate is is irrelevant…there are different degrees of commitment, and how we handle ourselves in times of crisis has an effect on how well Al-Qaeda other terrorist organizations can recruit. Do we hold ourselves to the same standards that we expect others to live up to, or are we hypocrites?
Shepard Smith said it best…
“Most experts say that torture consistently yields bad information.”
Think about that for a second, JP– take a deep breath and just think…
I imagine the evil people that want to do us harm have either fallen in love with us, or given up -huh? Considering Bush is such and idiot, and the entire Bush administration was just in that war for oil (the evil, capitalist republicans), – that all has to be true, because God KNOWS the information we got from “torture,” wasn’t reliable…
… and not one attack– wonder why that is– want to shed some light on it, I mean from a liberal perspective.
So which one is it, have the terrorists given up, or have they found love for our great country????
OF COURSE HOW EVER WE OBTAINED THE INFORMATION WAS RELIABLE…..I hope you picked up the sarcasm.
In a “good old fashioned war” there are rules of engagement. In a “good old fashioned war” we are dealing with other humans (hopefully). In this case we’re dealing with a populations that only understands brute force and terror (that’s why Saddam was so successful in controlling those sub-humans). They view kindness as weakness- They’ll cut your head off, JP with a grin on their face, and if we cut their heads off they think they get their 42 virgins in heaven.
How would YOU deal with these monsters??? Are you willing to put your family’s life on the line to spare one of these “people,” a brief dunk in a pool?
Think, before you respond with any feel good liberal la la land response!
Ah, so the fact that we haven’t been hit again is justification for these tactics, in which we lower ourselves to the level of our enemies? That’s the classic ends justifies the means argument, only there’s no proof that the means actually brought about the ends. (Seriously, if you have proof that torture allowed us to avert a terrorist attack, I’d like to see it. Something other than Dick Cheney’s word.)
It is far more likely that we haven’t been hit again due to the fact that we are waging two ground wars on their home turf. Our soldiers are right there in their hometown in harm’s way, so why do they have to go through the trouble of planning an attack on the mainland? Remember, we’re fighting them over there so that we don’t have to fight them over here, right?
Think, just think for a second, take a deep breath and just think about how our hypocrisy in this area affects our standing in the world. Our we truly Reagan’s “shining city on a hill” if we resort to such (undependable) tactics in tough times? Is it better to drag the rest of the world into the 21st century or be dragged back to the Middle Ages?
Now think before you respond with any narrowminded, neo-con response.
What I know is we haven’t been attacked, I know we rough upped some bastards and we’ve been safe. Common sense tells me those events are related.
Now, if I were a liberal, I’d hold on to some feel-good, milk toast, mamzy-pamzy, idealistic, non-realistic, shallow thinking belief that somehow, if we’re nice to our enemies everything will be milk and honey rosey—-that all sounds sickening to me.
And, Yes– if torturing those bastard SOBs have kept us safe, I’m all for it.
One more thing– F the world– The US has been the leader in EVERYTHING, ALWAYS for a reason- because we’ve done things the right way all the time up till now. I believe in American Exceptionalism (up till now), and it has to be staunchly defended.
I’m well aware liberals want a more equal world– I prefer our dominance in everything (BECAUSE we do do the right thing – not for any other reason)
Nick – Your last quote is one of the silliest things you have written to date and why your party has a 20% approval rating. You probably have never been out of OH let alone this country. One last thing, AMERICA DOES NOT TORTURE.
John,
Where did you go so wrong? Are you a full fledged blue blooded, union supporting, tax raising, big government, cradle to grave entitlement, abortion loving, gun controlling liberal now?
America hating Americans have always taken the position the world hates us because of our strength and wealth– the blame America first crowd does not like our dominance- is that you?
And since I live in Pennsylvania, I’ve been out of Ohio…
…and one more thing– I’m part of the the 80% disapproval rate for the republican party— they’ve become democrat lite– I see no real distinguishing characteristics between EITHER party- they both suck and are ruining us.
I suppose you LOVE what’s going on now with the Obama team.
Pelosi has been “really impressive” thus far. If she was a Republican all of you hypocrites on the left would be going nuts. She and the other nutjobs in that far left party will ensure that even when the Republicans are down for a cycle, they’ll be back.
“I’m well aware liberals want a more equal world– I prefer our dominance in everything (BECAUSE we do do the right thing – not for any other reason)”
I see nothing’s changed in the last few months on NCB. Thanks for the laughs, Nick. How I’ve missed your thoughtfulness.