The W
Views: 99946225
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
@439 .beats
The W - Current Events & Politics - We Decide, You Shut Up
This thread has 199 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(2094 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (22 total)
Wolfram J. Paulovich
Frankfurter








Since: 11.11.02
From: Fat City, Baby

Since last post: 2956 days
Last activity: 2326 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on
WE DECIDE, YOU SHUT UP
 
From a February 4 interview on The O'Reilly Factor, a Fox News program. Jeremy Glick, whose father was killed in the World Trade Center on September 11, reported after the interview O'Reilly said to him, "Get out of my studio before I tear you to fucking pieces."
 
Bill O'Reilly:  In the "Personal Stories" segment tonight, we were surprised to find out that an American who lost his father in the World Trade Center attack had signed an antiwar advertisement that accused the U.S.A. itself of terrorism. The offending passage read, "We too watched with shock the horrific events of September 11… we too mourned the thousands of innocent dead and shook our head at the terrible scenes of carnage—even as we recalled similar scenes in Baghdad, Panama City and, a generation ago, Vietnam." With us now is Jeremy Glick, whose father, Barry, was a Port Authority worker at the Trade Center. Mr. Glick is a co-author of the book Another World Is Possible. I'm surprised you signed this. You were the only one of all the families who signed.
Glick:  Well, actually, that's not true.
O'Reilly:  Who signed the advertisement?
Glick:  Peaceful Tomorrow, which represents 9/11 families, was also involved.
O'Reilly:  Hold it, hold it, hold it, Jeremy. You're the only one who signed this advertisement.
Glick:  As an individual.
O'Reilly:  Yes, as—with your name. You were the only one. I was surprised , and the reason I was surprised is that this ad equates the United States with the terrorists. And I was offended by that.
Glick: I'm actually shocked that you're surprised. Our current president inherited a political legacy from his father that's responsible for training militarily, and economically, and situating geopolitically the parties involved in the murder of my father and countless thousands of others. So I don't see why it's surprising—
O'Reilly:  All right. Now let me stop you here. So—
Glick: —that I would come back and want to support—
O'Reilly:  It is surprising, and I'll tell you why. I'll tell you why it's surprising.
Glick: —escalating—
O'Reilly:  You are mouthing a far-left position that is a marginal position in this society, which you're entitled to.
O'Reilly:  It's marginal—right.
O'Reilly: You're entitled to it, all right, but you're—you see, even—I'm sure your beliefs are sincere, but what upsets me is I don't think your father would be approving of this.
Glick:  Well, actually, my father thought that Bush's presidency was illegitimate.
O'Reilly:  Maybe he did, but—
Glick:  I also didn't think that Bush—
O'Reilly:  —I don't think that he'd be equating this country as a terrorist nation, as you are.
Glick:  Well, I wasn't saying that it was necessarily like that.
O'Reilly:  Yes, you are. You signed—
Glick:  What I'm saying is—
O'Reilly:  —this, and that absolutely said that.
Glick:  —is that six months before the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan, starting in the Carter Administration and continuing and escalating while Bush's father was head of the CIA, we recruited a hundred thousand radical mujahedeen to combat a democratic government in Afghanistan, the Turaki government.
O'Reilly:  All right, I don't want to—
Glick:  Maybe—
O'Reilly:  I don't want to debate world politics with you.
Glick:  Well, why not? This is about world politics.
O'Reilly:  Because number one, I don't really care what you think.
Glick:  Well, okay.
O'Reilly:  You're—I want to—
Glick:  But you do care, because you—
O'Reilly:  No, no. Look—
Glick:  The reason why you care is because you evoke 9/11—
O'Reilly:  Here's why I care.
Glick:  —to rationalize—
O'Reilly:  Here's why I care—
Glick:  Let me finish. You evoke 9/11 to rationalize everything from domestic plunder to imperialistic aggression worldwide.
O'Reilly:  Okay, that's a bunch—
Glick:  You evoke sympathy with the 9/11 families.
O'Reilly:  That's a bunch of crap. I've done more for the 9/11 families by their own admission—I've done more for them than you will ever hope to do.
Glick:  Okay.
O'Reilly:  So you keep your mouth shut when you sit here exploiting those people.
Glick:  Well, you're not representing me.
O'Reilly:  And I'd never represent you. You know why?
Glick:  Why?
O'Reilly:  Because you have a warped view of this world and a warped view of this country.
Glick:  Okay. 
O'Reilly:  Here's the record. You didn't support the action against Afghanistan to remove the Taliban. You were against it. Okay?
Glick:  Why would I want to brutalize and further punish the people of Afghanistan?
O'Reilly:  Who killed your father!
Glick:  The people in Afghanistan—
O'Reilly:  Who killed your father.
Glick:  —didn't kill my father.
O'Reilly:  Sure they did. The Al Qaeda people were trained there.
Glick:  The Al Qaeda people? What about the Afghan people?
O'Reilly:  See, I'm more angry about it than you are!
Glick:  So what about George Bush—
O'Reilly:  What about George Bush? He had nothing to do with it.
Glick:  —Senior, as director of the CIA.
O'Reilly:  He had nothing to do with it.
Glick:  So the people that trained a hundred thousand mujahedeen who were—
O'Reilly:  Man, I hope your mother is not watching this.
Glick:  Well, I hope she is.
O'Reilly:  I hope your mother is not watching this because you— That's it. I'm not going to say anymore.
Glick:  Okay.
O'Reilly:  In respect for your father—
Glick:  On September 14, do you want to know what I'm doing?
O'Reilly:  Shut up. Shut up.
Glick:  Oh, please don't tell me to shut up.
O'Reilly:  As respect—as respect—in respect for your father, who was a Port Authority worker, a fine American, who got killed unnecessarily by barbarians—
Glick:  By radical extremists who were trained by this government—
O'Reilly:  Out of respect for him—
Glick:  —not the people of America.
O'Reilly:  —I'm not going to—
Glick:  —the people of the ruling class, the small minority.
O'Reilly:  Cut his mike. I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of respect for your father.
Glick:  That means we're done?
O'Reilly:  We're done.


(Note from Jeb: I transcribed this from the May issue of Harper's Magazine, America's oldest continually published magazine. For more information about Harper's, visit their history online at:
http://www.harpers.org/about_harpers/history.php3

Any errors in spelling or punctuation are probably mine, as I typed this quickly.










The Obtuse Angle Archive.

Burns: Smither's this beer isn't working! I don't feel any younger, or funkier....
Smithers: I'll switch to the tablespoon, sir.
Promote this thread!
Mr. Heat Miser
Blutwurst








Since: 27.1.02

Since last post: 2544 days
Last activity: 647 days
#2 Posted on
Thoughts from the time this aired:

http://wienerboard.com/thread.php/id=9537

(edited by Mr. Heat Miser on 19.4.03 1829)


-MHM, winner of the 2000 Throwdown in Christmastown.
Wolfram J. Paulovich
Frankfurter








Since: 11.11.02
From: Fat City, Baby

Since last post: 2956 days
Last activity: 2326 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on
I apologize for printing something that everyone already saw. I typed it up to email some family members (I don't have a scanner) and thought to post it.

Generally, stuff that makes the short blurbs in Harper's isn't often available elsewhere (at least, not where anyone would normally find it). I assumed that it was probably the first printing of the transcript.

Hope the repeat doesn't ruin anyone's day. :)



The Obtuse Angle Archive.

Burns: Smither's this beer isn't working! I don't feel any younger, or funkier....
Smithers: I'll switch to the tablespoon, sir.
NIKO
Chorizo








Since: 24.4.02
From: Amherst, Massachusetts

Since last post: 3561 days
Last activity: 3471 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on
If you can find it, why not post the quote where O'Reilly used the term "wetbacks"? i dont think that one has been commented on.



"Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind."
--John F. Kennedy
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 6 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
My favorite O'Reilly moment is when he complains that Hollywood Liberals are all out-of-touch, not experts, why should anyone listen to them, blah-blah blah, and then not only has them on for a half-hour of prime-time, highly rated TV, but goes so far as to interview Susan Sarandon's MOTHER. I mean, if Susan Sarandon isn't qualified to have a platform to air her views, how is her mother?

It's also funny to watch, because you can tell that O'Reilly actually kind of likes Susan Sarandon, even though it's his job not to.



It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Michael Novotny, A smart guy, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, not racist, a Chihuahua, Data, an Asian Gangster, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, White Chocolate, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Mr. Peabody, Bjork, Spider-Man, Tom Daschle, Boston, a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage, not a Hipster, and a Gringo.
The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2012 days
Last activity: 1744 days
#6 Posted on
Moegates, O'Reilly has stated many times on his radio show that if Susan Sarandon or Tim Robbins were in a movie he wanted to see, he'd still see it...so that as you will.

Its free speech, Susan Sarandon gets to say what she wants and people are allowed to use their free speech and call her on it, and Sarandon can call them on it, and then the callers can call her on it...and so on...:)

(edited by The Vile1 on 22.4.03 1010)


"I am many things Kal-El, but here I am god."
-Darkseid
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by The Vile1
    Moegates, O'Reilly has stated many times on his radio show that if Susan Sarandon or Tim Robbins were in a movie he wanted to see, he'd still see it...so that as you will.

Thankfully this is true of most people. A lot of people play that game of "I won't see X's movies" or "I won't buy stuff from Y Company" because of their stances.

My roomate in college refused to by Domino's pizza because Mike Ilich(Domino's/Tigers/Red Wings owner) donated money to pro-life groups. I calmly looked at him and reminded him that if I followed such a position I wouldn't be able to by anything from anywhere or see any sort of movies or entertainment...or read the newspaper.

I just settled myself down and had some more Ben & Jerry's...




Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1315 days
Last activity: 81 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on
I just think that if people are going to use their celebrity status to make a political point, they should understand when that status gets tarnished by that stance.

We all have Freedom of Speech, but only someone who has made millions making movies will get invited onto a news show to air their opinions. When people like Sarandon and Garafalo preach their opinions in a manner which people like me have no means at all to respond, boycotting their work is the only recourse.

No, if a movie comes out with Sarandon or Robbins in it that I think is interesting, I may well still see it. But their public behavior has left me less likely to get excited about a film where they are the main selling point. I would feel much better if I could actually debate them, instead of being preached at, but I also have the Freedom to Ignore.
Michael Moore, on the other hand, is getting the Polanski treatment. It will be a cold day in hell before I put money in that jack-ass's pocket....





Still on the Shelf #5
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 6 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
Mike Illich owns Little Ceasaers and didn't own the Tigers until fairly recently. You're thinking of Dominos founder Tom I-forget-his-last-name (I want to say Monahan).

I take the exact opposite postion as you. I'm not going to give my money to someone who is going to spend it in a way that's reprehensible to me. That's very different from bopycotting people because of their opinions. If you see a Sarandon movie, the portion of the 10 bucks she gets is probably going to a children's charity, or maybe to a fancy dinner or something. The 10 bucks I would have spent on a Dominos pizza is likely going to Michigan Right-to-life (or a fancy dinner). I don't care what his views are, and I won't make economic decisions based on them, but I will make economic decisions based on where my money is going.

I understand there's the school of thought that politics and economic decisions should be separate (do what's best for you economically with your money, and what's best for you politically with your vote), but I son't subscribe to it.

My original post meant to point this out - conservatives (O'Reilly included) have problems with the celebs (supposadly) not because of their views, but because they spout-off ill-informed opinion that shouldn't - but supposadly do - carry the same weight as the experts informed opinions. Which is why I find it ironic that O'Reilly's response is not to ignore said opinion - which would make sense - and instead choose to devote entire prime-time shows to these people and their mother's, instead of to the experts - which is what he's saying should happen.

This is, of course, because it's all bullshit. The right just wants to set up the strawman so they can spend a lot of time and energy destroying it. It's easy to make Janene Garafolo look dumb on TV, so they'll take the easy way out, instead of getting someone on there to have an informed debate on the issues. Notice the right NEVER has any right-wing celebrities who pop off ill-informed (James "I agree with every single thing Rudy Guliani ever did" Woods, I'm looking at you) on. Can you imagine the field day O'Reilly would have had with him if he'd said that about Bill Clinton?



It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Michael Novotny, A smart guy, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, not racist, a Chihuahua, Data, an Asian Gangster, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, White Chocolate, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Mr. Peabody, Bjork, Spider-Man, Tom Daschle, Boston, a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage, not a Hipster, and a Gringo.
The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2012 days
Last activity: 1744 days
#10 Posted on
I think its a perfectly acceptable form of freedom of speech by responding to a person who's views you agree with by not buying what they sell or ignoring them completely. Not that I would always do that, but Hollywood has to realize that free speech goes both ways, and its not blacklisting if people stop buying into their products because of their views. If Hollywood wants to talk it, they have to be willing to take whatever consequences come with it, because free speech applies to all American citizens, not just Hollywood people.

Back to the subject...Bill O'Reilly kicks ass! See freedom of speech, now anyone else feel free to speak against my statement of O'Reilly kicking ass. If you don't excercise it you are a communist! Silence is despicable and should be punishable by law...see more free speech Come and get it.



"I am many things Kal-El, but here I am god."
-Darkseid
The Vile1
Lap cheong








Since: 4.9.02
From: California

Since last post: 2012 days
Last activity: 1744 days
#11 Posted on
(deleted by The Vile1 on 22.4.03 1710)
MoeGates
Andouille








Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 6 hours
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
ooooH. The rarely-seen wienerboard double post shows its head. A facinating sighting, Watson.



It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Michael Novotny, A smart guy, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, not racist, a Chihuahua, Data, an Asian Gangster, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, White Chocolate, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Mr. Peabody, Bjork, Spider-Man, Tom Daschle, Boston, a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage, not a Hipster, and a Gringo.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1987 days
Last activity: 1921 days
#13 Posted on
"Michael Moore, on the other hand, is getting the Polanski treatment. It will be a cold day in hell before I put money in that jack-ass's pocket...."

And yet I'm putting money on the fact that enjoy professional sports, which is littered with drunks, drug addicts, wifebeaters, abusers, rapists, etc. etc. Why is it those in the arts industry get villified so much more than others? Here's some news for ya: I don't know if you actually WATCH films, but Polanski and Moore BOTH deserve the money and the awards they've won for their work. Just like Tyson deserves his purse percentage when he gets his ass handed to him by Lewis again later this year, just like (for English peeps here) Roy Keane deserves his paycheck for his work at Manchester United. They do their jobs. Does everybody with a stain in their past not deserve to work ever again?



Hail To The King, Baby

Ubermonkeys
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02
From: Michigan

Since last post: 3518 days
Last activity: 3392 days
AIM:  
#14 Posted on
And of course, neither Domino's, Susan Sarandon, or Tim Robbins have made anything good in YEARS. (97's Nothing To Lose with Robbins and Martin Lawerence was a fun buddy movie.)

Also, I'm a fan of Janeane's, but when was the last time she did any non-standup performance that didn't suck hell's ass?

Boycotting crap because it's crap- there's an idea.

Does everybody with a stain in their past not deserve to work ever again?

Come on Grimis, the Lewinsky line is RIGHT THERE.



Weekly Visitor: Dying. :o(

Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1269 days
Last activity: 1066 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29

    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    I don't know if you actually WATCH films, but Polanski and Moore BOTH deserve the money and the awards they've won for their work.

That's incredibly debateable...




oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1987 days
Last activity: 1921 days
#16 Posted on
No, it's really not. I don't particularly like Moore or his hysterical approach to issues, but Bowling For Columbine was a fantastically-made, genuinely original documentary that didn't simply stick the same ol' "Clips 'n' Voice-over" approach. And Polanski's directorial efforts on The Pianist outranked everyone's work this year except MAYBE Scorcese, and we all know he's winning zip.



Hail To The King, Baby

OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 12 days
AIM:  
#17 Posted on

    Originally posted by Ubermonkeys
    Also, I'm a fan of Janeane's, but when was the last time she did any non-standup performance that didn't suck hell's ass?


It's a pretty well known fact that Jeneane Garafalo has never realized she's allowed to turn a script down. I *love* her, but I can't think of any good movies she's appeared in, save her three lines in "Dogma".

And I think the constant boycotting is insanely silly. I don't agree with Arnold Schwartzenegger's politics, but I'm still going to go see "Terminator 3". (I do like to pretend that I don't drink Coors beer because they donate an insane amount of money to the Republican party, but it's really just because their beer tastes like piss.)




Great warrior? Wars not make one great.
CarlCX
Salami








Since: 1.5.02
From: California.

Since last post: 43 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on
I have to disagree on Moore's deserving his oscar, on account of the "inaccuracies" in Bowling.

(conveniently, I do think he's a gargantuan ass.)
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3262 days
Last activity: 3262 days
#19 Posted on

    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    Does everybody with a stain in their past not deserve to work ever again?


Not when you flee the country, sorry.
astrobstrd
Bockwurst








Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH

Since last post: 2580 days
Last activity: 2547 days
AIM:  
#20 Posted on

    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard

      Originally posted by Ubermonkeys
      Also, I'm a fan of Janeane's, but when was the last time she did any non-standup performance that didn't suck hell's ass?


    It's a pretty well known fact that Jeneane Garafalo has never realized she's allowed to turn a script down. I *love* her, but I can't think of any good movies she's appeared in, save her three lines in "Dogma".

    And I think the constant boycotting is insanely silly. I don't agree with Arnold Schwartzenegger's politics, but I'm still going to go see "Terminator 3". (I do like to pretend that I don't drink Coors beer because they donate an insane amount of money to the Republican party, but it's really just because their beer tastes like piss.)



Come on, Wet Hot American Summer was a lot of fun.



Ph-nglui mgwl'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: For those who oppose politicization of the war against Iraq
Next thread: MSA--School Funded Terrorism
Previous thread: Salon shows its true colors
(2094 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I really don't know what to say about this, as it comes as a personal shock to me: TIME.com: Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse How far can this possibly go? I mean, has this sort of thing (a high-ranking U.S.
The W - Current Events & Politics - We Decide, You Shut UpRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.143 seconds.