Help me out with my letter to O'Really.

[kixot]

I am e-mailing Bill O'Really challenging him to own up to his pre-war comments and would like to run the letter by some of my fellow DU'ers to see what you guys think. Any suggestions will be appreciated. I will, of course, sign the letter with my actual name, I just don't feel like broadcasting right now.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. O'Reilly,

I watch your show on occasion and have found it to be informative as well as entertaining. Some time ago, however, (March 18, 2003) you made the following public comments in an interview with ABC's Good Morning America:

*************************************************************************
"Here's, 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 (...) 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?"
*************************************************************************

Given that the current administration has yet to provide significant proof to back up the claims that took us to war I believe, then, that it would behoof you as well as be a credit to your journalistic intgrity to follow up with a segment on your show calling the administration's deceit for exactly what it is. You yourself were bamboozled into following the party line as were many of us but now the time has come to right the wrongs of the past and come clean to the American public. I am confident that such a move will redeem you in the eyes of many viewers who may have felt that you held an unreasonable and unprofessional bias for the Iraq war in the days leading to it.

Sincerely,
kixot

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. What's the point? He is a professional liar.

It's like writing Don King or John Gotti and asking why they lie?

Because that's their job! They love it! It's not like they haven't figured out that they are lying.

He is trying to warp public opinion in Bush's favor. That is why he has a job at Faux News. End of story. Just accept it and fight it by using your energy to a huge opposition that will crush him.


On the other hand, if you are just trying to irritate him, go right ahead! LOL!

[kixot]

2. That IS my point.

I'm just looking to make him squirm mildly before hitting the delete key. I wonder if he'll actually take a moment to feel guilty over being such a whore.

[soothsayer]

3. he already yelled at a caller today about this

calling him a "zombie" for reading and believing democratic websites.

o-lie-ly went on to say the * didn't LIE about the WMDs, he was just WRONG. Didn't try to purposely mislead us, he just innocently had bad info.

[renegade000]

4. blamming our intelligence services....

how patriotic

[HFishbine]

39. Little fault lies with the intellegence

Huge blame for those who politicized it. You're not up-to-date on the issue if you haven't seen this yet:

http://www.ceip.org/intel

[lovedems]

10. Didn't lie? Just wrong?

Well, this little "boo boo" has cost thousands of people their lives. It is absolutely insulting that he even makes that justification. Innocently had bad information? Oh, Cheney's daily visits to the CIA were for cookies and milk? UUGH! I despise people like this.

[fdmoney]

5. That's great...

I'd love to see that pompous windbag apologize on 'The No-Spin Zone' (lol).

Good luck in your endeavors. But IF he acknowledges your email at all, he'll probably side-step the issue by saying that they HAD them but have since been moved to syria, or lybia, or fantasia.

fdd

[soothsayer]

6. but if you insist, then spell check first

like behoove instead of behoof (tho behoof sounds funny and mad cowish---tho it IS a word)

[kixot]

8. ahhh, yes

Webster did say is was an arcane definition when I double checked it, I forgot it's also spelled with a 'v'.

[zeemike]

7. He is a liar and he knows it

But you are right to call him on it and I think you should send the letter as is. It is a good job.
The only reason people continue to lie is because they never have to answer to it, and you are asking him to answer for it.

[eileen from OH]

9. We should have a Fax Friday where we bombard his show

with faxes like this.

eileen from OH

[UTUSN]

11. How'bout, "O'REILLY, You Lying Putz"? n/t

[Demonaut]

12. your problem is the weapons inspectors

the're still looking and probably will do so for quite awhile........

[msolowes]

13. what about the last president?

Was Bill Clinton a lier when he said this: http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_2043.shtml

[NicoleM]

14. First of all,

it's "liar," not "lier." Secondly, who took us to war? Oh yeah, it was the honorable and always honest George W. Bush.

Enjoy your stay. I have a feeling it will be brief.

[msolowes]

15. he did take us to war

on intelligence mostly generated by the last administration. Clinton also bombed an aspirin factory and killed civilians. I guess its ok to lie if your a liberal. The thing is this was one instance where Bill Clinton was right and truthful. Unfortunately he did not have the guts as this president did to back up threats with action.

[calimary]

16. Uh, friend, the "intelligence mostly generated by the last

administration" was the intelligence that told the truth - HAVE WE FOUND any of these fabled WMDs? That bush, cheney, Rice, Wolfie, Rummy and the rest of these rogues insisted over and over and over and over ABSOLUTELY were there, with, as dick cheney would say "no doubt"?

The "intelligence mostly generated by the last administration" was the intelligence that this administration cavalierly disregarded because they were only interested in cherry-picking the little pieces here and there that they could claim as support for a conclusion they'd already reached.

This so-called president has no guts. If he had, he wouldn't have spent much of the day of 9/11 flying all over the Sunbelt trying to find a good place to hide, while at least Rudy Guiliani and others were standing out there in front of the cameras and microphones from the get-go. If he had, he would have stayed with the Texas Air National Guard for his full tour of duty, and been man enough not to refuse to take a flight physical (HMMM, wonder why? Wonder what he was concerned that they might find...). If he had, he'd have been brave enough to declare himself for what he REALLY is, a stealth reactionary knuckle-dragger posing in the sheep's clothing of "compassionate conservatism." No wonder sheep like you respond.

I guess it's okay to lie if you're a conservative.

[msolowes]

17. Honest Bill Clinton

firstly,

it was the decision of the secret service to look for a place to "hide" as you call it. Presidents do not have the say in this matter. So, did Bill Clinton ever lie in your mind?? Or he was jsut forced to lie by the extreme Right Wingers. If this is the best that the left has, I think Rev. Roberson is right it will be Bush in a landslide.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

18. Sure Bill lied

but it was about a BLOWJOB and not a war in which almost 500 GIs and thousands of innocent Iraqis have been MURDERED. There is blood on Bush's hands.

[msolowes]

19. wrong

Bush was acting on intelligence from clinton. It had nothign to do with the blowjob. I am tlaking of the Iraq war. Since the Clinton administration gave the intelligence that Bush used, I guess Bill Clinton has blood on his hands as well.

[ProfessorGAC]

21. Unbrilliant

Par for the course.
The Professor

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

22. meant to reply to 18

you have got to be joking. How did Bush use Clinton's intelligence?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

28. Bush IGNORED Intelligence from the Clinton Adminstration

Why was Ashcroft flying on private jets PRIOR to 9/11?

<snip>
"ABC News reported, "White House officials acknowledged that U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes." The president received that briefing around the same time the FBI was receiving information that a large number of Arabs were training at U.S. flight schools. When CBS asked other Administration officials about Rice and Bush's denials, they hit a brick wall: "The usually talkative Attorney General John Ashcroft just stared when reporters asked him about the terror warnings. FBI Chief Robert Mueller also refused to comment." Others were outraged. Kristen Breitweiser, a 9/11 widow, said, "How is it possible we have a national security advisor coming out and saying we had no idea they could use planes as weapons when we had FBI records from 1991 stating that this is a possibility." "

http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9643

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

37. Figure this one out, then...

if Bush was acting on intelligence from President Clinton, then why did both Condoleeza Rice and Colon Powell go on various news programs in mid to late 2001 and say that Saddaam was neutralized. That he had no WMD, period. Either they were lying to the American public, or Bush was lying to the American public.
Hell, Powell even said that the sanctions Clinton enforced effetively neutered Saddaam. (Although they did kill a lot of innocent Iraqis)
So if Bush was acting on intelligence from Clinton, where'd Rice and Powell get the information that Saddam had NO WMD?

[HFishbine]

40. Wronger

You, my friend, if you can stand to have your mind expanded just a little, need to read this:

http://www.ceip.org/intel

[ProfessorGAC]

20. Do Some Research

Your aspirin factory was a money laundering and transferral front for al Qaida. That's been common knowledge for 2 years. The Clintonites knew that the purpose of the factory was three fold. OTC pharma, possible use for chem weapons manufacture, and a front to funnel money into and out of to finance field operatives.

If you paid attention, you'd know that.
The Professor

[msolowes]

23. no evidence

If thats so then why did Mike Mccury release a statment 2 months after the attack saying the administration had bad intelligence and probally should not have gone after the factory?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

24. I f you're going to compare

the aspirin factory to the war in Iraq I think you should look at some casualty figures and think about the motives behind the incidents.

[ProfessorGAC]

25. National Security

Same reason the current administration won't tell anybody anything. Only in this case, there was actual national security involved. At that point, with no attack directly on U.S. soil, they didn't want al Qaida to know how much they knew.

These things are in the public record. Go look them up.

The Professor

[msolowes]

26. I agree

The point is there was nothing wrong with the attack clinton launched and also there is nothing wrong with this war. Bush is following his own doctrine. The left does not like him because he is principled. Clinton talked about doing the same exact thing Bushg has done, but was not willing to pay the political price. This president has put everything on the line politically to do what he feels is right. Yes Americans have died, that has happened in just about every war America has waged. Sacrafices have to be made for freedom and National Security.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

27. How has the war in Iraq made us more free?

The left doesn't hate Bush because he's principled. We hate Bush because his "principles" are evil!

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

31. Reagan defeated the USSR?

Wow. Maybe his face should be on the dime.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HFishbine]

41. Ruh, roh

I hope you've enjoyed your visit.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

33. "Reagan...defeated the USSR"???

What?
Reagan's massive military buildup was only the culmination of policies started by TRUMAN (You know, that America-hating liberal President from WWII?). It was sheer luck that he was President when things started to unravel for the Soviet Union.
Get a history lession. Also, you can't ignore the impact the Solidarity movement in Poland had on the Soviets, either.
Reagan had nothing to do with that, either.
Reagan didn't do jack.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

34. He Did go to Bitburg

To honor the Nazi dead. give the Gipper some credit!

:eyes:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

30. "The left does not like him because he is principled."

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Principled my ass! He LIED about WMDs, he LIED in the State of the Union Address. He lies everytime he opens his trap. Please. Get your facts straight.

"Bush is following his own doctrine."

Yup, just like a good fascist.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

36. Next we're going to hear

something to the effect of: "Bush showed restraint when he didn't whipe 40% of the population off the planet after 9/11. He would have been within his right because we were attacked!"

It's the usual hate-filled Reagan-worshipping self-dillusional freeper rhetoric!

[ProfessorGAC]

35. You Keep Telling Yourself That

Nobody lied, nobody died in the example you want to toss out. It just happened, and nobody had to be convinced we should do it. Congresspeople knew the why and how. In this case, even Congress was lied to.

If you don't see the difference, you have my sympathy.
The Professor

[LeahMira]

38. What do you expect?

Your comments are on target, but what do you expect to happen as a result of your e-mail? If you and fifty other friends plan to write over the next week or two, it might get noticed. I doubt that one e-mail will cause much of a fuss unless you happen somehow to be really lucky with your timing. Is there any other place where you could send a copy of your letter? Anyone who's scheduled to be on his show that you think would be interested in bring up the point?

You have done a good job... the tone is perfect. My thought is that it shouldn't disappear into the cyberspace between O'Reilly's ears. So how about thinking of other ways you can use it that would get more clout.

Watch your spelling... I think the word you meant to use in one place is "behoove." Also, wasn't one weapons inspection team just called home? That would be a point I think would be worthy of mention.

You did ask for suggestions... all in all though, it's a good letter. Go for it!