Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
big_bad_buff
New member
should be interesting, i hope its on before 9 so i can watch it
Michael Moore on the O'Reilly Factor tonight
- Thread starter big_bad_buff
- Start date
C
Code
Guest
Yep, it's on at 7 here. Can't wait.
I saw the clip last night where Bill and Michael met, and you could tell Moore was scared shitless.
Bill is light years ahead of Moore in terms of intelligence, class and presentation.
I saw the clip last night where Bill and Michael met, and you could tell Moore was scared shitless.
Bill is light years ahead of Moore in terms of intelligence, class and presentation.
the nature boy
New member
Code said:
That really isnt' saying much.
C
Code
Guest
For Moore, no it's not.
After watching the clip you can tell Moore is not only hesitant (rightly so) but Bill is just so much more upstanding.
I wonder what Moore would have said to the invite if the cameras were off.
After watching the clip you can tell Moore is not only hesitant (rightly so) but Bill is just so much more upstanding.
I wonder what Moore would have said to the invite if the cameras were off.
The Nature Boy said:
big_bad_buff
New member
I think Moore is very intelligent, you have to be to come up with the stuff he does, how well he does on the spot we shall see…I think bill could rip anyone apart if he wanted too though
the show isnt live is it?
the show isnt live is it?
C
Code
Guest
big_bad_buff said:
I think it's live for ya'll on the Right Coast.
T
The Shadow
Guest
The Nature Boy said:
Moore reminds me of a Louie Anderson clone
the nature boy
New member
The Shadow said:
With better teeth.
C
Code
Guest
The Shadow said:
And no cool game-show or cartoon under his belt.
Oh and far less funny.
the nature boy
New member
Code said:
Upstanding??? What?? This is the same O'Reilly that worked on some tabloid television show years back? Have you ever listened to his Radio program? It's horrible. He cuts people off before they can make their point and then spends a half an hour on his point, which he speaks as fact when it's obviously his opinion. He's not much different than Michael Moore, except Moore goes for more shock value.
C
Code
Guest
The Nature Boy said:
Oh and the whole reporting the truth thing. Moore has been debunked re: every single movie he's made. At least Bill lets you know his opinion seperately from the facts.
Yeah, I listen to his show. Not sure what's so bad about cutting someone off who is saying the same, abusive, rhetoric over and over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over over and over.
the nature boy
New member
Code said:
YEAH, every caller that opposed Bill is abusive. OKAY.
C
Code
Guest
And he doesn't cut off every caller that opposes his views.
But it's a radio show, and there's only so much time. SO when a caller makes their point, no reason to let them keep wasting time.
But it's a radio show, and there's only so much time. SO when a caller makes their point, no reason to let them keep wasting time.
The Nature Boy said:
A
alien amp pharm
Guest
*cuts Nature Boy's mic off*
PIGEON-RAT
New member
this should be good
Everybody at these things has an earpiece and an "off" button except the guest. Home field advantage. We all know everything can be perceived any way you want it by manipulating timing, response, length of response, questions, rebuttles...
I`ve seen it a million times. It`s OK but don`t call it "News".
I`ve seen it a million times. It`s OK but don`t call it "News".
PIGEON-RAT
New member
gonelifting said:
lol I'm not watching this for news, I hope it's heavily manipulated; I want to be entertained. I'd like to see Moore get hoisted by his own petard.
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
O'Reilly can rip anyone up in his own mind because he uses shit against someone that means absolutely nothing to sane peope. That's like me driving you off this board and "tearing you a new one" because I tell you to shut up and question your choice in avatars, and have the rest of the board being like "omg Burning owned him holy shit".big_bad_buff said:
C
Code
Guest
gonelifting said:
He does have a news segment, after which he provides commentary.
But he's a talking head, everyone should be aware that he (like all talking heads) has an angenda.
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
John Pinnet lol. Funny man.Y_Lifter said:
Code said:
Yes I understand. but The whole freaking channel is called Fox NEWS. People are getting brainwashed. If all you hear is the same shit over and over by VERY smart opinionated leaning to one side... people mixed within the news, you`ll believe it. We have a nation of believers.
You may have an entertaining show tonight, but will you get any truth out of it? Just two people trying to outwit each other while one (and his crew) holds the controls. That`s entertainment, not anything else.
C
Code
Guest
I only watch it for O'Reilly. I was under the impression that they had other, more Left-Winged talking heads.
Used to watch it for Banfield, but I can never figure out when she's on, she's hawt!
Used to watch it for Banfield, but I can never figure out when she's on, she's hawt!
gonelifting said:
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
Those 2? Broccoli? wtf man,Y_Lifter said:
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
You guys see the previews for that documentary called outfoxed, where it exposes fox's bullshit ? Interviews from many former Fox journalists telling it how it is.
Y_lifter
New member
Burning_Inside said:
Sorry.. I do this all the time to Mrs Y thinking she is up to speed on my brain.
Shadow mentioned louie anderson look alike and I posted the you been here four hour quote thinking it was louis that did that bit..
My bad as it was John Pinnet not louis and I get them mixed up all the time..
Hence my "I get those 2 confused" confusion..
you eat like "Flee Rirry"(Free Willy)
Last edited:
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
i didnt even see shadows postY_Lifter said:
A
alien amp pharm
Guest
alien amp pharm said:
wow it worked.
*turns Nature Boy's mic back on*
C
Code
Guest
jackangel said:code, you're an apologist for bill o'reilly? why? is he not an idiot in various ways? does he not come across like a complete ass?
Nope, not a apologist for him. He's excersizing his rights at the highest levels. He's doing what a lot of people don't have the nuts to do, he says what he feels and sticks with it.
I'd like a liberal just as much if he/she could wage war like Bill does. He does a good job at being a conservative mouth-piece.
I listen to Oreilly on the radio cause i'm too lazy to turn it after Howard gets off at 11am.. hell his spin zone is such a joke... i liked how he backed bush about WMD in iraq and had to apologize when they didn't find any....when you get him, he cuts you off right away..go back to Inside Edition....
notoriousQQ
New member
should be entertaining. will try and watch it if i'm not busy doing something important like taking a dump.
MICHAEL MOORE/O'REILLY SHOWDOWN AT CONVENTION
Tue Jul 27 2004 16:51:50 ET
FOX NEWS is planning to air a redhot interview between Bill O'Reilly and boxoffice sensation Michael Moore on Tuesday.
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained an embargoed transcript of the session:
Moore: That’s fair, we’ll just stick to the issues
O’Reilly: The issues… alright good, now, one of the issues is you because you’ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butler’s investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didn’t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didn’t lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, that’s not a lie.
M: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage…
O: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn’t the truth
M: Well, I’d have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasn’t true… actually it’s president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a –
O: Ok, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president –
M: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie
O: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine –
M: But that was your question –
O: Just the issues. You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, US intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, “he lied.” This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious –
M: Well, that’s almost pathological – I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test –
O: Alright, now you’re dancing around a question –
M: No I’m not, there’s no dancing
O: He didn’t lie
M: He said something that wasn’t true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources
M: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn’t listen to anybody
O: They wouldn’t go by Russian intelligence and Blair’s intelligence too
M: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said “What you got on Iraq?” and Richard Clarke’s going “Oh well this wasn’t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.”
O: You’re diverting the issue…did you read Woodward’s book?
M: No, I haven’t read his book.
O: Woodward’s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?
M: I know who he is.
O: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said “President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, “slam dunk” if you’re the president, you ignore all that?
M: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.
O: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.
M: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn’t communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didn’t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th
O: Nobody disputes that
M: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a “slam dunk” and your going to go to war.
O: You’ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they’re all saying the same thing that’s why. You’re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.
M: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can’t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war, I mean, I don’t know a worse –
O: It wasn’t a lie
M: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?
O: I call that bad information, acting on bad information – not a lie
M: A seven year old can get away with that –
O: Alright, your turn to ask me a question—
M: ‘Mom and Dad it was just bad information’—
O: I’m not going to get you to admit it wasn’t a lie, go ahead
M: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question
O: OK
M: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?
O: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say. We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.
M: And, but what were they killed for?
O: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war, to remove a brutal dictator
O: Well we’re back to the weapons of mass destruction
M: But that was the reason
O: The weapons of mass destruction
M: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat
O: That’s right
M: And there was no threat, was there?
O: It was a mistake
M: Oh, just a mistake, and that’s what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, “We’re sorry.” I don’t think that is good enough.
O: I don’t think its good enough either for those parents
M: So we agree on that
O: but that is the historical nature of what happened
M: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?
O: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional
M: No, not intentional, it was a mistake
O: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that
M: Really, I’m driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead
O: If it were unintentional and you weren’t impaired or anything like that
M: So that’s all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake – how would you feel towards me
O: Ok, now we are wandering
M: No, but my point is –
O: I saw what your point is and I answered your question
M: But why? What did they die for?
O: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people –
M: No, that was not the reason –
O: That’s what they died for
M: -they were given –
O: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake
M: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world –
O: Alright, I’ve got anther question—
M: Would you sacrifice—just finish on this. Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?
O: Depends what the circumstances were.
M: You would sacrifice your child?
O: I would sacrifice myself—I’m not talking for any children—to remove the Taliban. Would you?
M: Uh huh.
O: Would you? That’s my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?
M: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.
O: Al Qeada was given refuge by the Taliban.
M: But we didn’t go after them—did we?
O: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qeada.
M: That’s why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.
O: OK, well look you cant kill everybody. You wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan—you wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan, would you?
M: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.
O: How?
M: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Osama was—
O: Why was that?
M: That’s my question.
O: Because Pakistan didn’t want its territory of sovereignty violated.
M: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didn’t go there. He got a two month head start.
O: Alright, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?
M: No, unless it is a threat to us.
O: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day long—you would have let him go?
M: That’s not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.
O: Before—from 33-until 41 he wasn’t an imminent threat to the United States.
M: There’s a lot of things we should have done.
O: You wouldn’t have removed him.
M: I wouldn’t have even allowed him to come to power.
O: That was a preemption from Michael Moore—you would have invaded.
M: If we’d done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, woah, I’m trying to stop this war right now.
O: I know you are but—
M: Are you against that? Stopping this war?
O: No we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to—
M: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.
O: I would sacrifice myself—
M: Your child—Its Bush sending the children there.
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old—
O: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.
M: Say ‘I Bill O’Reilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah’
O: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous
M: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?
O: Look it’s a worldwide terrorism—I know that escapes you—
M: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?
O: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.
M: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?
O: Iraq aided terrorist—don’t you know anything about any of that?
M: So you’re saying Iraq is responsible for what?
O: I’m saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.
M: You’re not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.
O: I’m not? You’re his biggest defender in the media.
M: Now come on.
O: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: If you were running the country, he’d still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: You wouldn’t have removed him.
M: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---
O: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.
M: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.
O: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.
M: The people rose up.
O: why? Because they went bankrupt.
M: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up—
O: Alright alright.
M:--that’s how you, let me ask you this question.
O: One more.
M: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You don’t do it down the barrel of a gun. That’s not how you deliver it.
O: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam—
M: Why didn’t they rise up?
O: Because they couldn’t, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off—
M: well that’s true in many countries throughout the world__
O: It is, it’s a shame—
M:--and you know what people have done, they’ve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. There’s many ways—
O: I’m glad we’ve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alright—and the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and that’s the fair way to do it. Right?
M: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You wouldn’t send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?
O: I would.
M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?
O: That’s right.
M: Where’s the recruiter?
O: You’d love to get rid of me.
M: No I don’t want—I want you to live. I want you to live.
O: I appreciate that. Michael Moore everybody. There he is…
END
Tue Jul 27 2004 16:51:50 ET
FOX NEWS is planning to air a redhot interview between Bill O'Reilly and boxoffice sensation Michael Moore on Tuesday.
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained an embargoed transcript of the session:
Moore: That’s fair, we’ll just stick to the issues
O’Reilly: The issues… alright good, now, one of the issues is you because you’ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butler’s investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didn’t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didn’t lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, that’s not a lie.
M: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage…
O: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn’t the truth
M: Well, I’d have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasn’t true… actually it’s president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a –
O: Ok, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president –
M: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie
O: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine –
M: But that was your question –
O: Just the issues. You’ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying… British intelligence, US intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, “he lied.” This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious –
M: Well, that’s almost pathological – I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test –
O: Alright, now you’re dancing around a question –
M: No I’m not, there’s no dancing
O: He didn’t lie
M: He said something that wasn’t true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources
M: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn’t listen to anybody
O: They wouldn’t go by Russian intelligence and Blair’s intelligence too
M: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said “What you got on Iraq?” and Richard Clarke’s going “Oh well this wasn’t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.”
O: You’re diverting the issue…did you read Woodward’s book?
M: No, I haven’t read his book.
O: Woodward’s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?
M: I know who he is.
O: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said “President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, “slam dunk” if you’re the president, you ignore all that?
M: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.
O: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.
M: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn’t communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didn’t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th
O: Nobody disputes that
M: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a “slam dunk” and your going to go to war.
O: You’ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they’re all saying the same thing that’s why. You’re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.
M: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can’t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war, I mean, I don’t know a worse –
O: It wasn’t a lie
M: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?
O: I call that bad information, acting on bad information – not a lie
M: A seven year old can get away with that –
O: Alright, your turn to ask me a question—
M: ‘Mom and Dad it was just bad information’—
O: I’m not going to get you to admit it wasn’t a lie, go ahead
M: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question
O: OK
M: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?
O: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say. We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.
M: And, but what were they killed for?
O: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war, to remove a brutal dictator
O: Well we’re back to the weapons of mass destruction
M: But that was the reason
O: The weapons of mass destruction
M: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat
O: That’s right
M: And there was no threat, was there?
O: It was a mistake
M: Oh, just a mistake, and that’s what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, “We’re sorry.” I don’t think that is good enough.
O: I don’t think its good enough either for those parents
M: So we agree on that
O: but that is the historical nature of what happened
M: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?
O: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional
M: No, not intentional, it was a mistake
O: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that
M: Really, I’m driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead
O: If it were unintentional and you weren’t impaired or anything like that
M: So that’s all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake – how would you feel towards me
O: Ok, now we are wandering
M: No, but my point is –
O: I saw what your point is and I answered your question
M: But why? What did they die for?
O: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people –
M: No, that was not the reason –
O: That’s what they died for
M: -they were given –
O: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake
M: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world –
O: Alright, I’ve got anther question—
M: Would you sacrifice—just finish on this. Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?
O: Depends what the circumstances were.
M: You would sacrifice your child?
O: I would sacrifice myself—I’m not talking for any children—to remove the Taliban. Would you?
M: Uh huh.
O: Would you? That’s my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?
M: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.
O: Al Qeada was given refuge by the Taliban.
M: But we didn’t go after them—did we?
O: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qeada.
M: That’s why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.
O: OK, well look you cant kill everybody. You wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan—you wouldn’t have invaded Afghanistan, would you?
M: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.
O: How?
M: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Osama was—
O: Why was that?
M: That’s my question.
O: Because Pakistan didn’t want its territory of sovereignty violated.
M: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didn’t go there. He got a two month head start.
O: Alright, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?
M: No, unless it is a threat to us.
O: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day long—you would have let him go?
M: That’s not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.
O: Before—from 33-until 41 he wasn’t an imminent threat to the United States.
M: There’s a lot of things we should have done.
O: You wouldn’t have removed him.
M: I wouldn’t have even allowed him to come to power.
O: That was a preemption from Michael Moore—you would have invaded.
M: If we’d done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, woah, I’m trying to stop this war right now.
O: I know you are but—
M: Are you against that? Stopping this war?
O: No we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to—
M: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.
O: I would sacrifice myself—
M: Your child—Its Bush sending the children there.
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You and I don’t go to war, because we’re too old—
O: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.
M: Say ‘I Bill O’Reilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah’
O: I’m not going to say what you say, you’re a, that’s ridiculous
M: You don’t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?
O: Look it’s a worldwide terrorism—I know that escapes you—
M: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?
O: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.
M: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?
O: Iraq aided terrorist—don’t you know anything about any of that?
M: So you’re saying Iraq is responsible for what?
O: I’m saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.
M: You’re not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.
O: I’m not? You’re his biggest defender in the media.
M: Now come on.
O: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: If you were running the country, he’d still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: You wouldn’t have removed him.
M: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---
O: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.
M: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.
O: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.
M: The people rose up.
O: why? Because they went bankrupt.
M: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up—
O: Alright alright.
M:--that’s how you, let me ask you this question.
O: One more.
M: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You don’t do it down the barrel of a gun. That’s not how you deliver it.
O: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam—
M: Why didn’t they rise up?
O: Because they couldn’t, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off—
M: well that’s true in many countries throughout the world__
O: It is, it’s a shame—
M:--and you know what people have done, they’ve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. There’s many ways—
O: I’m glad we’ve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alright—and the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and that’s the fair way to do it. Right?
M: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You wouldn’t send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?
O: I would.
M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?
O: That’s right.
M: Where’s the recruiter?
O: You’d love to get rid of me.
M: No I don’t want—I want you to live. I want you to live.
O: I appreciate that. Michael Moore everybody. There he is…
END
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Yeah, Moore does seem to get smacked around a bit. A like how the whole "lie" bit is exposed and proven to be such a lie in itself, but Moore will not back down.
I felt like I was lied to. That`s good enough for me. NEXT.
Longhorn85
New member
Moore insists that Bush lied because he acted on intelligence. Kerry acted on the same intelligence (voted in favor of the war), yet he doesn't feel Kerry lied. Moore also denied that Saddam would still be in power if he had his way, although he says he would not have invaded Iraq.
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
Longhorn85 said:
OK and O'Reilly wouldn't answer the question of if he'd back his kid going to fight this war either cause he's a pussy. He knows he wouldn't and yet he has no issues of watching Bush send other people's kids off to die however. he's a bitch ass hypocrite hobag. I don't believe for one minute that he'd sign himself up to go to secure fucking fallujah either. He hesitated on that question for so long cause he didn't want to give the correct answer then he finally decided to lie at the end and look good and say yeah he would.
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Yeah O'Reilly was cornered with the question about sending his kids to war, but the problem is that it's not his choice to send his kids to war. He can't make the decision for them to enlist, and it's mighty convenient for him to say that he would go since it would never actually happen.
Watching the interview really made the blind ideologies on both sides come through clearly, but it seems like Moore's is a bit more unwieldy. He would just not back away from claiming Bush lied.
And even after the 9/11 Commission says that Bush didn't lie, wacky lefties continue to insist he did. So these people will pick and choose when to listen to information coming from non-partisan sources. They want to ignore all the intelligence that pointed toward Iraq having WMD coming from the CIA, MI-6, and Russia, but then they'll base all their trust in the NSA and State Dept. suggesting the WMD was destroyed. Then they'll also ignore the findings of the 9/11 Commission when it disagrees with what they want to believe.
Nobody wants to admit they were wrong. Sad state of affairs.
On a more positive note, did anyone catch the interview with Ben Affleck at the beginning of the show? He seems a lot more intelligent than I expected. O'Reilly tried to trap him a bit, but Affleck isn't a blind supporter of Kerry, and he had his own viewpoints rather than copying those of everyone else. And he also wasn't afraid to show when he was ignorant of some of Kerry's flaws. He seemed flustered when O'Reilly tried to trap him, but he handled himself well and didn't fall for it by responding with a knee-jerk reaction.
Watching the interview really made the blind ideologies on both sides come through clearly, but it seems like Moore's is a bit more unwieldy. He would just not back away from claiming Bush lied.
And even after the 9/11 Commission says that Bush didn't lie, wacky lefties continue to insist he did. So these people will pick and choose when to listen to information coming from non-partisan sources. They want to ignore all the intelligence that pointed toward Iraq having WMD coming from the CIA, MI-6, and Russia, but then they'll base all their trust in the NSA and State Dept. suggesting the WMD was destroyed. Then they'll also ignore the findings of the 9/11 Commission when it disagrees with what they want to believe.
Nobody wants to admit they were wrong. Sad state of affairs.
On a more positive note, did anyone catch the interview with Ben Affleck at the beginning of the show? He seems a lot more intelligent than I expected. O'Reilly tried to trap him a bit, but Affleck isn't a blind supporter of Kerry, and he had his own viewpoints rather than copying those of everyone else. And he also wasn't afraid to show when he was ignorant of some of Kerry's flaws. He seemed flustered when O'Reilly tried to trap him, but he handled himself well and didn't fall for it by responding with a knee-jerk reaction.
big_bad_buff
New member
i missed the whole show, pissed me off, it wasnt on at 7. so i started getting ready for work and forgot to check at 8
Longhorn85
New member
Burning_Inside said:
So when he doesn't answer he is a pussy, and when he does answer he is a liar. So much for your credibility.
The whole "would you sacrifice your child" question is bullshit. Nobody is sacrificing their children. Bush isnt sacrificing anybody. These people volunteered to enlist in the military. I dont know how many people here served, but there's a little segment above the dotted line that touches on the fact that maybe, just maybe, you might be called up for active duty and be required to fight overseas. I signed my contract a little over 4 years ago, have they changed since then?
Longhorn85
New member
PIGEON-RAT said:
Yeah, it was a good segment. He did well for himself. He is pro 2d amendment. He was complaining about his tax cut, but acted like he was unaware that he could let the govt keep it. Couldn't he just have his accountant write a check?
Also interesting when O'Reilly pointed out that in Mass the upper income tax-payers have the option of denying the tax cut on the tax form, and Kerry DID NOT elect to do this.
Burning_Inside
Elite Mentor
no, his credibility. O Reilly has his cake and eats it all day every day of the week.Longhorn85 said:
Longhorn85
New member
gonelifting said:
How does this differ from stations like NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and PBS which lean left? FOX is a lone wolf out there. We need that balance, I don't know of anyone who only watches one network. We need FOX.
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Longhorn85 said:
You have to admit that all the other networks political leanings are somewhat veiled, wheareas FOX is so blatant in its bias it's laughable.
Longhorn85
New member
PIGEON-RAT said:
I think FOX is unapologetically conservative-leaning, but I don't find that laughable, especially since it is the only one amongst several networks that are left leaning and have been for many, many years.
Robert Jan
New member
ORB what are you talking about are you saying there were working WMD in Iraq at the time of the invasion? I think not.PIGEON-RAT said:
Bush actually said Iraq had nuclear weapons that could be utilised within 40 minutes. He said if we wait for the smoking gun the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud. All these statements are now know to have been based on absolutely crap. I don't see how anybody can deny he lied.
Bush, being the executive, the big dog, the President, used a 1991 IAEA report and spun it as being current intelligence in 2002 about the Iraqi weapons capabilities. That bit of supposed curent intel came from the Pentagon, your fellow neocons, Fieth, Rummy and Wolfi regurgitated it for Cheney and Bush.Longhorn85 said:
Longhorn85
New member
Robert Jan said:
He acted on the intel as he knew it. As Commander in Chief he took action. Similarly legislators acted on the same intel, they (including Kerry), passed a measure approving military action vs Iraq. So did the UN.
So all of these bodies acted in their capacity on the same intel. If this means Bush "lied", then Congress lied and the UN lied.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml
The phrase in question was 16-words long: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
There remains no evidence that Iraq actually did try to buy uranium. But the recent reports suggest it was reasonable for Mr. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair to believe that Iraq may have tried to do so.
The recent British report by Lord Butler — while finding that the intelligence on Iraq's alleged weapons was "seriously flawed" — concluded that Mr. Bush's statement and a similar one by Blair were "well-founded."
C
Code
Guest
He's pointing out that Bush was basing it off intel. The 16 word statement.
Which is more like a "I told ya so." rather than a "moon-walk".
Your nips are leaking, you need to pump some milk out orb.
Which is more like a "I told ya so." rather than a "moon-walk".
Your nips are leaking, you need to pump some milk out orb.
WODIN said:
Olsen Twins Banger
New member
LOL O'LIEY was pwned by Moore
C
Code
Guest
Did you see it?? You're on crack.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.html
Olsen Twins Banger said:
Olsen Twins Banger
New member
i didnt see it but from the transcripts in this thread it seems as the moore came out looking better, that could be much different though, on tv
Moneymaker
New member
Michael Moore reminds me of hmmmmmm....... oh thats right, a fat left wing whale who would give away my hard earned money to every terrorist and enemy this country ever had. He is an unamerican pile of shit!!
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Robert Jan said:
never said that rob
Longhorn85
New member
Olsen Twins Banger said:
Maybe you should become informed before you form an opinion.
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Olsen Twins Banger said:
Actually, I thought Moore got more serious ownage when I only read the transcript. But on TV he did seem to really catch O'Reilly with the question about sending his kids to war.
However, on TV you could see Moore's face, and it was turning red a lot, and he would make some ridiculous comment and make nervous laughter to himself while reaching for his cup. He was so very uncomfortable and realized he was being torn apart.
He seemed absolutely inept when he kept insisting Bush lied, it was sad. Then O'Reilly knocked his legs out from underneath him a few more times. Moore really lost that bout, but after seeing the whole thing, I was only really left with a bad taste in my mouth thinking about the blind ideology on both sides.
Ish
New member
http://208.37.27.97/sn2//torrents/2276/The OReilly Factor - Michael Moore Interview.wmv.torrent
Torrent of the interview if anyone cares.
Torrent of the interview if anyone cares.
C
Code
Guest
So you didn't see it, and the transcripts, which *clearly* have Moore getting a satchel charge of man-milk splattered on his face, but you think Moore pwned Bill?
Come on, tell teh truth, you hadn't even read the transcripts when you posted that, you just wanted to hop on one bandwagon or another.
Yeah, the video of Moore asking him about his kids has an obvious effect on O'Reily, but he handled it well and stood on solid ground the entire 8 minutes.
Whereas Moore got his cock handed to him in a paper bag and looked positively retarded by sticking to the "Bush lied" story.
Come on, tell teh truth, you hadn't even read the transcripts when you posted that, you just wanted to hop on one bandwagon or another.
Yeah, the video of Moore asking him about his kids has an obvious effect on O'Reily, but he handled it well and stood on solid ground the entire 8 minutes.
Whereas Moore got his cock handed to him in a paper bag and looked positively retarded by sticking to the "Bush lied" story.
Olsen Twins Banger said:
C
Code
Guest
You're just pissed because Air America was shorter lived than your sex life.
I'd LOVE to have a democratic (or third party) talking head who was on O'Reily's level. I am not so binary to load all my eggs into one party. And I'd watch and/or listen to him/her if there was one.
But Air America was like The Onion, big on humor and low on facts.
I'd LOVE to have a democratic (or third party) talking head who was on O'Reily's level. I am not so binary to load all my eggs into one party. And I'd watch and/or listen to him/her if there was one.
But Air America was like The Onion, big on humor and low on facts.
WODIN said:
G
Gambino
Guest
WODIN Get off your damn knees and stop sucking o'riely cock.[/QUOTE said:
You must believe everything Fox says.Code said:
http://www.airamericaradio.com/
They are alive and kicking.
Also, get this. A clear channel sports station in Miami-Dade just went total Air America for a 6 mnth shot. LOL!!!
Olsen Twins Banger
New member
honestly code i read the transcripts and the whole time i was reading i was laughing
because in my honest opinon i think moore pwned o'liey
and i still believe that, maybe if i watch the interview i will change my mind
but i doubt it
because in my honest opinon i think moore pwned o'liey
and i still believe that, maybe if i watch the interview i will change my mind
but i doubt it
monsterstud
New member
Olsen Twins Banger said:
I saw the interview. It was like a knife fight with one inch knives. Neither scored real big, neither seemed very effective, and they both left with a couple of paper cuts.
Testosterone boy
New member
Going on OReilly's show is like entering the lions den with all of the home field advantages going to the lion.
Has anyone ever got on the show and totally owned the guy who calls ALL of the shots.
Imagine Bush entering the office of Moore for a debate. Bush would get a lot of serious black eyes and do little other than deny, deny, and deny.
Has anyone ever got on the show and totally owned the guy who calls ALL of the shots.
Imagine Bush entering the office of Moore for a debate. Bush would get a lot of serious black eyes and do little other than deny, deny, and deny.
Moneymaker
New member
Are you guys kidding me? The entire freaking thing is common sense anyone with an ounce of common sense in their body, that is either not an illegal immigrant or living off of my dime, would be a full fledged staunch conservative. Moore and his Marxist belief system not only makes him a communist but also suggests that he is a fat unintelligent blowhole who would love to see this country be impoverished with its hand out for aid just so that we would fit in with the rest of the nations of the world. I'm surprised they didn't pull this fat fucks carcass out of the pilot seat of one of the planes that hit the world trade center.
Testosterone boy
New member
Due to the internet, the entire world gets to pass judgement on the mentality of the neo-cons.bluepeter said:
I see the extinction of the party with this being a contributing factor. They simply come across as jack asses 90% of the time. Its a me, me, me world they live in and they think it is OK to kill, plunder, and pollute the less fortunate or different.
Tiervexx
New member
The Nature Boy said:
no shit.
Have you ever heard Harry Browne's radio show? You can download them off his website www.harrybrowne.com.
He can rip anyone to shreads, AND be very nice about it.
Moneymaker
New member
bluepeter said:
What's ignorant? The fact that i don't think my hard earned money should go to support those who don't work or who aren't willing to work. Or should I advocate racism like the liberals do through affirmative action. Or maybe i should hand over AMERICAS foreign policy decisions to a group of countries who are our sworn enemies, i.e. the united nations, which is of course John Kerry's plan. Then again maybe we should weaken our military, as is the policy of most liberals, and rely soley on the aid of other nations when we find ourselves being attacked or at war, you know like they do of us.
No I don't really care for those things. And i don't need for other people to like America afterall thats what made America great in the first place. But if you don't like that maybe you should move back to France with Michael Moore and the rest of the pussies.
bluepeter
New member
Moneymaker said:
hhhhmmmmmm, yes. I advocate being open-minded, tolerant and having equal rights so that makes me a pussy that should move back to France (where I've never been and my ancestors did not come from) to be with all the pussies that make up France.
Tell me, what is your view on muslims?
Robert Jan
New member
Most people who are labelled pussies are in fact superior to a degree they are unrelated to the person who calls them such. What kind of grown man would refer to somebody as a "pussy" anyway? What is this? third grade?
C
Code
Guest
Honestly?
They would do well to remove 60% of the humor and I'd listen more often.
They would do well to remove 60% of the humor and I'd listen more often.
WODIN said:
Tactile
New member
I used to respect Moore back in the days of "Roger And Me", and when he would expose a lot of the nasty corportate goings on, but I feel he crossed a line with Farenheit 911. I just started drifting off 2/3's of the way through because it was just an unrelenting assault of the same message. I don't even fully trust his opinion anymore because of the fancy slice & splice job done with Columbine.
If his main concern was getting the message out with 911 I feel he could've done it with a straight to video, or a possible documentary on TV, so everyone could easily see it. Just an added bonus that he's become filthy rich from the theatre release I suppose.
If his main concern was getting the message out with 911 I feel he could've done it with a straight to video, or a possible documentary on TV, so everyone could easily see it. Just an added bonus that he's become filthy rich from the theatre release I suppose.
Testosterone boy
New member
You fault him for making the most popular documentary of all time and releasing it to theatres?Tactile said:
I think Mooore is all about protecting the interests of the little guy. That is my take. He is just unusually good at it.
strangebrew
New member
LOL @ people saying Moore owned O'Reily. It just didn't happen. O'Reily didn't own Moore either. It's not possible to own someone in a debate when that "someone" argues like a child - a complete lack of logic and sense. Let's face it, Moore owned himself without any help from O'Reily.
I'm not a fan of Reily either, but I don't understand how some of you fail to see Moore for who he really is - a blithering idiot. The fact that F911 has made over 100k is a testament to just how stupid some people are.
I'm not a fan of Reily either, but I don't understand how some of you fail to see Moore for who he really is - a blithering idiot. The fact that F911 has made over 100k is a testament to just how stupid some people are.
O'Reilly's claim: Bush didn't lie, he acted honestly on faulty intelligence.
That's not 100% true. In the days after 911, which Moore was TRYING to say while getting interrupted, was that Bush went to the intelligence officials and said "Look into Iraq." They said we got no link. He then made them double- and triple-check it. They stuck to their guns.
Eventually he found someone who would say yes.
The point is, before launching a hugely expensive and American life-risking endeavor, he was NOT saying "Are you super-sure these guys pose a threat? We need to be 100% sure." Instead he SOUGHT and seized upon the faulty evidence that was given and pushed us into it.
All OReilly could say was "blah blah blah brutal dictator." Which is obviously bullshit, there are a dozen equally brutal biatches in other nations.
THAT'S why moore was trying to force OReilly to answer the "would you send your children" question, and that's why the big O kept avoiding it. The underlying question was, do the premises of war hold up to scrutiny such that YOU would send your child to risk his/her life? And OReilly's implied answer was no.
That's not 100% true. In the days after 911, which Moore was TRYING to say while getting interrupted, was that Bush went to the intelligence officials and said "Look into Iraq." They said we got no link. He then made them double- and triple-check it. They stuck to their guns.
Eventually he found someone who would say yes.
The point is, before launching a hugely expensive and American life-risking endeavor, he was NOT saying "Are you super-sure these guys pose a threat? We need to be 100% sure." Instead he SOUGHT and seized upon the faulty evidence that was given and pushed us into it.
All OReilly could say was "blah blah blah brutal dictator." Which is obviously bullshit, there are a dozen equally brutal biatches in other nations.
THAT'S why moore was trying to force OReilly to answer the "would you send your children" question, and that's why the big O kept avoiding it. The underlying question was, do the premises of war hold up to scrutiny such that YOU would send your child to risk his/her life? And OReilly's implied answer was no.
Testosterone boy
New member
well put.casualbb said:
Approaches my lucidity which goes totally unnoticed.
Longhorn85
New member
casualbb said:
He didn't have to look far because the UK, UN and Russian intel sources as well as the CIA all agreed he had WMD or the capability to produce WMD and the willingness to sell it to terrorists. Also established link to Al-Q.
Post 9-11 world + New Bush Doctrine + Iraq already on our shit list = Invasion
This phase of the war on terror is almost over. Soon hopefully you guys will be whining about our invasion of Syria.
Testosterone boy
New member
where you been mang?Mandinka2 said:
C
Code
Guest
Of course there's no documentation on that, save for someone's fiction novel he wrote after not getting treated the way he wanted and had an axe to grind.
casualbb said:
Testosterone boy
New member
There are at least 8 current written documentaries on the exploits and misdoings of the Bushbarians.Code said:
Probably not found at local BX.
C
Code
Guest
LOL, BX. Haven't heard that since 1990.
Testosterone boy said:There are at least 8 current written documentaries on the exploits and misdoings of the Bushbarians.
Probably not found at local BX.
PIGEON-RAT
New member
Why don't any Dems criticize the lord and saviour Bill Clinton for backing Bush on the Iraq War?
the nature boy
New member
PIGEON-RAT said:
Politics.
