Bill O'Reilly on the 3/18/03 edition of Good Morning America:
"Here's the bottom line on this for every American and everybody in the world, nobody knows for sure, all right? We don't know what he has. We think he has 8,500 liters of anthrax. But let's see. But there's a doubt on both sides. And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right? But I'm giving my government the benefit of the doubt...if he has 8,500 liters of anthrax that he's not going to give up, even though the United Nations demanded that he do that, we are doing the right thing. If he doesn't have any weapons, then we are doing the wrong thing."
Bill O'Reilly on the 4/22/03 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, interviewing retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis:
O'REILLY: Colonel, if weapons of mass destruction aren't found, your reputation, my reputation -- because I will have to apologize because I bought into it, I bought into it -- and out of a scale 1 to 10, 10 is the best, how certain are you that we're going to find these weapons of mass destruction?
MAGINNIS: There's a 10 there, Bill.
[A little later in the conversation]: O'REILLY: Real fast, Colonel, any prediction of when something is going to happen on your part? Real fast.
MAGINNIS: In the next two weeks, we are going to have many hundreds of people in there. I would say within a month, we will have a lot of..
O'REILLY: All right, a month from today, we'll do this story again, and then we have it on tape. Gentlemen, thanks very much. Very interesting.
One month later came and went. Would you like to wager a guess what happened on the May 22nd edition of The O'Reilly Factor? If you said - business as usual with no mention of this at all, you win!
I never knew he reads this board! Because after seeing the facts that you so delicately pointed out, I'm sure you're going to get a direct response from him tonight. That's what you were looking for right?
ha ha ha...for some reason I think the "no spin zone" (as usual) would be spinning like ballerina…
The problem is, hypocrisy is no longer an issue for the media, the same goes for accountability. Someone’s “word” is on par with wrestling retirements and to get called to the carpet on anything, you have to heavily fabricate or out and out LIE (see Jayson Blair, NY Times).
If it is mentioned (and it should be, seeing as Bill holds a sword over anyone who even considers going back on his / her word), I’m sure he’ll have a damn good explanation and if you don’t agree, you ain’t American. Or right.
David Adams: I never knew he reads this board! Because after seeing the facts that you so delicately pointed out, I'm sure you're going to get a direct response from him tonight. That's what you were looking for right?
What *I'm* looking for is for O'Reilly to come clean and admit he's a second rate Gordon Liddy. And Liddy was third rate. But it won't happen, because Bill speaks (shoves) the truth (down your throat)! USA! USA!
Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high...
So the located mobile bio-chem weapons labs don't count?
I think it is till a little early to demand an apology from Bill, and a little petty. In Janeane's case, there is nothing left to prove. Iraqi's did indeed celebrate our arrival. The jury is still out on the WMDs, and nowhere did anyone say that we were going to walk in there and there would be WMDs lying on the streets. We knew they would be hidden, and we knew that it would take time to find them. Lets see what Uday has to say after he surrenders....
I personally think we should be focusing LESS on finding the WMDs at this point, and more on getting Iraq on its feet. There is now plenty of time to hunt for the weapons.
I am not going to pretend that Bill is "unbias" Flea... I just think it is a little premature to call him to account for something that the jury is still out on. Janeane's comments were pretty cut and dry. Bill's require a little more proof.
Some Iraqis celebrated our arrival. I can get you a tape of Americans celebrating Michael Jackson's latest album. It doesn't mean America loves Michael Jackson.
Mobile Bio-Chem weapons lab? Give me break. Every time someone has stumbled accross something more powerful than Oxy10, you've posted something about "Is THIS proof enough for you guys" only to have it turn out to be nothing 3 days later. And I have a feeling you'll be doing the same a year from now. You've made up your mind that Jr. said it, you believe it, it's the gospel truth, and nothing will convince you otherwise. If nothing is still found, you'll justify it with some other excuse of why Jr. of course would never ever mislead the American public. Look, you say he needs more time. Make like O'Reilly and put a date out there. And we'll check back then.
Look, I'm still pretty on the fence on whether we did the right thing or not. And regardless of the who's, why's and when's, the fact is is that the people of that country are better off than they were 2 months ago, which is really the bottom line for me.
But the whole WMD thing is utter bullshit, and I have no problem believing Jr. knowingly lied to everyone about it. He's a politician. I don't know why some people have such blinders on about this fact. If it serves his agenda he'll look you in your eye and lie to face, and nobody ever gets to be president if they can't do this.
(edited by MoeGates on 24.5.03 0114) "I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States Senator. It's sort of freaking me out."
Associated Press interview with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 04-07-2003.
I'm as shocked as you are to be posting this, but I'm a big enough man to give credit where credit is due. It's not quite what I wanted, but more than I expected and these days, you've got to take what you can get:
The bad news for President Bush comes on the weapons of mass destruction front. CIA chief, George Tenet, wants a panel to investigate whether U.S. intelligence was faulty on that issues vis-a-vis Iraq. A panel? Shouldn't tenet know what the heck is true and what isn't?
What's going on? The U.S. has captured enough scientists like Dr. Germ and Ms. Anthrax, or whomever, to get a picture of what Saddam Hussein had or didn't have. The Bush administration needs to begin explaining the situation. "Talking Points" understands time is needed, but the right wing spin that Saddam was a deadly weapon himself isn't going to cut it here.
The American people must have honest, accurate intelligence in a world this dangerous. This is a vital issue that we hope will be candidly addressed by the President and soon.
I don't think anybody accused Tenet of being a rocket scientist...
Right, because he was only the one saying all along "it looks like Iraq doesn't really have any WMD supplies that are even vaguely threatening" and then Donald Rumsfeld said "you are stupid! We have PROOF that we cannot show anybody that there are plenty of WMDS. Boatloads" and the American press said "well, if they have PROOF that they won't show us, that's good enough for us" and now it looks like Tenet was, you know, right all along.
Originally posted by MoeGates And regardless of the who's, why's and when's, the fact is is that the people of that country are better off than they were 2 months ago, which is really the bottom line for me.
Since US control of the region still has no end in sight, I think this is still debatable. There is no infrastructure in place to help them organize their own government. And since the profitable resources are all being auctioned off to American companies, the future of Iraq is very dubious at best.
Are political dissidents being tortured and executed? No. So they are better off in that sense. But there is still no a long-term plan for independent political and economic stability - and that's what concerns me.
"It's hard to be a prophet and still make a profit." - Da Bush Babees
Guru, pork in and of itself isn't necessarily corrupt. By strict definition, it is simply the directing of tax monies to your district or state from the Federal treasury. While often wasteful, it isn't always.