O'Reilly is an asshole. I remember watching this and found this transcript of it. Self righteous pig headed bastard! If you talked to me like that I'd bust you right in the face and watch the blood come out of your nose! Also, check out the Pepsi deal gone bad. O' Reilly you are scum. and Your NO Republican either, just an ASSHOLE along the likes of Jerry Springer, people who need to do anything for ratings..
Read Below:
Note:Before you read this vile and insulting interview by Bill O'Reilly, let me say I watched this interview two times, this was the single most outrageous interview I have ever seen on any TV news show, anywhere by anyone. This man lost his Father in the 9-11 terrorist attacks and O'Reilly treated him like dirt. He tried to discredit and marginalize everything Mr. Glick said and showed him no respect at all just because he disagreed with O'Reilly. To say it was the most UN-professional interview ever done by a so-called journalist is an under-statement.
Try to remember if you ever saw a real journalist, anywhere in your life, tell an invited guest to shut up, shut up, and you just shut your mouth. Then tell the audio man to cut off his mic, what happened to free speech o'reilly. After all, these are the same free speech rights O'Reilly just defended the night before in regards to the boycott of Rush Limbaugh's sponsors.
I guess in the biased, one-sided, conservative, all-spin zone world of Bill O'Reilly it seems you only have free speech rights when you agree with Bill and his conservative political views.
The next night on the factor (2-5-03) o'reilly read an e-mail about the Glick interview telling him he should be taken off the air for his treatment of Mr. Glick. The reply to that by o'reilly was "when someone comes into your house and spits on the floor they get no respect and you show them the door." That is a direct quote from Bill O'Reilly. So what Bill is saying is that if you come on the factor and you don't agree with him you do not have free speech rights and you are an UN-American commie who gets no respect from him.
If anyone doubts any of this, go buy the transcripts at foxnews.com and read them for yourself, or just watch the factor and see how he treats people who agree with him compared to people that do not agree with him.
Partial Transcript: "The O'Reilly Factor 2-4-03
O'REILLY:" In the Personal Stories" segment tonight, we were surprised to find out than an American who lost his father in the World Trade Center attack had signed an anti-war advertisement that accused the USA 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 heads 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 of the families who signed...
JEREMY GLICK: Well, actually, that's not true.
O'REILLY: Who signed the advertisement?
GLICK: Peaceful Tomorrow, which represents 9/11 families, were 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: Well, you say -- I remember earlier you said it was a moral equivalency, and it's actually a material equivalency. And just to back up for a second about your surprise, I'm actually shocked that you're surprised. If you think about it, our current president, who I feel and many feel is in this position illegitimately by neglecting the voices of Afro- Americans in the Florida coup, which, actually, somebody got impeached for during the Reconstruction period -- Our current president now inherited a legacy from his father and inherited a political legacy that's responsible for training militarily, economically, and situating geopolitically the parties involved in the alleged assassination and the murder of my father and countless of thousands of others. So I don't see why it's surprising...
O'REILLY: All right. Now let me stop you here. So...
GLICK: ... for you to think 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.
GLICK: 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 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 in -- 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 mujahadeens 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, No. 1, I don't really care what you think.
GLICK: Well, OK.
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: OK. 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: OK.
O'REILLY: So you keep your mouth shut when you sit here exploiting those people.
GLICK: Well, you're not representing me. 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: Well, explain that. Let me give you an example of a parallel...
O'REILLY: No, I'm not going to debate this with you, all right.
GLICK: Well, let me give you an example of parallel experience. On September 14...
O'REILLY: No, no. Here's -- here's the...
GLICK: On September 14...
O'REILLY: Here's the record.
GLICK: OK.
O'REILLY: All right. You didn't support the action against Afghanistan to remove the Taliban. You were against it, OK.
GLICK: Why would I want to brutalize and further punish the people in 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: The director -- senior as director of the CIA.
O'REILLY: He had nothing to do with it.
GLICK: So the people that trained a hundred thousand Mujahadeen who were...
O'REILLY: Man, I hope your mom isn't 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: OK.
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 mic. I'm not going to dress you down anymore, out of respect for your father. We will be back in a moment with more of THE FACTOR.
GLICK: That means we're done?
O'REILLY: We're done.
Then this happened right before the commercial break:
What you can not see here because it's a text transcript, is right after O'Reilly said "we're done" he made two motions with his hand. He (O'Reilly) waved at someone off camera as to say come here and get him (referring to Jeremy Glick) then he did a move with his thumb, he held his right thumb up and raised it up in a short little motion. It's as if he were hitch-hiking, like get him outta here. I am guessing he was telling someone on his staff or his bodyguard to throw Glick out of the studio.
Here's the sickening apology quote O'Reilly gave after the commercials:
OREILLY: "I have to apologize. If I knew that guy, Jeremy Glick, was going to be like that, I never would have brought him in here, and I feel bad for his family. I really do."
The truly sad part is that if Mr. Glick were pro-bush and pro-war, and agreed with o'reilly, he would have been allowed to say whatever he wanted to, in the so-called no spin zone, and he would have been treated with total respect. Since he did not hold those positions he was told to shut up and shut your mouth and cut his mic off. I guess it's only a no-spin zone when you agree with o'reilly or his views.
This is from the same guy (O'Reilly) who just the night before accused a man from takebackthemedia.com of trying to violate Rush Limbaugh's free speech rights by calling for everyone to boycott his sponsors. Which "as an american" he has the right to do, boycotts are a tradition and a right in america.Yet when Mr. Glick tried to state his views and opinions on the factor, Mr. "free speech" Bill O'Reilly told him to shut up, shut up, you just shut your mouth.
So much for free speech on the factor.
--------
Speaking of boycotts, o'reilly called for a boycott of pepsi in august of 2002 because they hired the rapper Ludacris to do a commercial, this is all well documented.
August 27, 2002 - http://www.boycottwatch.org - Fox News Channel commentator and host of The O'Reilly Factor urges people to boycott Pepsi after decided to run commercials featuring rapper Ludicrous. The boycott is based on Pepsi hiring a spokesman who is "peddling antisocial behavior" according to O'Reilly.
Here are a couple quotes from the king of spin Bill O'Reilly:
OREILLY: "I'm calling for all responsible Americans to fight back and punish Pepsi for using a man who degrades women, who encourages substance abuse, and does all the things that hurt particularly the poor in our society," I'm calling for all Americans to say, hey, Pepsi, i'm not drinking your stuff. You want to hang around with Ludicrous, you do that, I'm not hanging around with you. Am I wrong to do that?
Call me crazy but that looks like calling for a Pepsi boycott to me.
OREILLY: "So here's the deal, Pepsi. You want to cultivate Ludicrous? Fine. I'm drinking Coke. I'm sending you a message. I don't like your choice of pitchmen, so Dr. Pepper is now on my menu."
UPDATE August 28, 2002 - http://www.boycottwatch.org - Pepsi canceled plans to feature rapper Ludicrous as spokesperson after Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly declares a boycott. - Boycott worked in less than 24 hours.
According to The O'Reilly Factor, Pepsi was inundated with thousands of phone calls from irate Factor viewers regarding the Ludicrous ads. As a result, Pepsi announced they would not air the ads.
The decision to pull the ads came a day after Bill O'Reilly, host of Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor," bashed Pepsi as "immoral" for using Ludicrous to promote the soft drink and urged viewers to boycott Pepsi.
That looks like a boycott to me.
Then after all that o'reilly told Mr. Stinson from takebackthemedia.com it was unamerican to call for a boycott of Rush Limbaugh's sponsors. It seems that boycotts are ok in o'reilly's world as long as you don't call for one against a conservative. Then in reply to an e-mail sent to the factor (2-4-03) accusing him of being a hypocrite on the two different boycotts o'reilly denied he called for a boycott of Pepsi. He (O'Reilly) claimed it was not a boycott because he did not actually say the word "boycott." I don't know about you, but to me this sounds like an argument a 5 year old would make, not a Harvard graduate with a masters degree. If you doubt any of this just do a google search on o'reilly and Pepsi boycotts.
Here is the e-mail to Bill and his reply, this is right from the factor transcript:
Lise Rousseau, Lafayette, Colorado, "Mr. O'Reilly, imagine my confusion as I watched you criticize the protester for organizing the Limbaugh boycott. Last August, I heard you tacitly call for a boycott against Pepsi for hiring Ludicrous. There is a lack of consistency in your rhetoric."
OREILLY: No, there isn't, Ms. Rousseau. First of all -- Ms. Rousseau. First of all, I never do anything tacitly. I do things directly. I simply said I wasn't going to drink Pepsi while that guy was on their payroll. No boycott was ever mentioned by me.
Bill just lied his ass off folks. His own news network (FOX) even has a story where it reports o'reilly called for a boycott of Pepsi. And as you can see above, the boycott of Pepsi by Bill O'Reilly is well documented.
Here is the 1st paragraph of the FOX news story:
Pepsi-Cola of North America said Wednesday that it was yanking its 30-second television spot featuring rapper Ludacris off the air -- just a day after Bill O'Reilly, Fox News Channel's host of The O'Reilly Factor, assailed Pepsi as "immoral" for using the controversial rapper and urged his viewers to boycott the beverage company.
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,61589,00.html.
Is he saying his own news network is lying about the Pepsi boycott too ?
In the world of Bill O'Reilly and FOX news, you are only allowed to have free speech if you agree with them. This is called fascism, it's a sad day in america when a conservative fascist (O'Reilly) on a conservative fascist fraud of a news network can get away with violating a persons free speech rights. He defends Rush Limbaugh's (Republican) free speech rights one night then violates Jeremy Glicks (Democrat) free speech rights the very next night.
Then he has the nerve to claim he is an independent, not a conservative.
If you believe that e-mail me at sss_2333@yahoo.com because I have a bridge to sell you real cheap. He also told Newt Gingrich he was an objective analyst, after you pick yourself up off the floor from laughter remember he was serious.
Musings from a variety of people from Delaware County, Pennsylvania.
O' Reilly is a smug neo thinker who along with rush, brainwash americans. I think that mr. Ward does see the whole picture and you are the idiot.
ReplyDeleteB_Lamb ? 18 year old blogger who only post 2 or 3of his own? pleeze! you aren't old enough to even drink you asshole.
ReplyDeleteO'Reilly is an asshole my friend.
ReplyDeleteYes, I must agree. I don't remember O'Reilly calling for a boycott of coke when they continued to use kobe as a spokesperson for sprite (isn't rape a bad example for the youth?). And where did this idea come from in the first place, who gives a damn for the SPOKESPERSON of a SOFT DRINK?!
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't the enlightened (snicker) (hill) billy talk about boycotting Bush for his preemptive strike based on lies? Why doesn't he talk about how the U.S. installed Saddam in the first place? Why? Because he loves the current government in which the rich are allowed to have all the tax breaks they want, billion-dollar-a-year oil companies are subsidized, and the hard-working lower classes and middle-classes foot the bill.
His call for the boycott of pepsi is just a blatant racist with his own agenda, why not a boycott of walmart for unfair employee wages, sexist promotion policy? Nike for sweatshops? The list becomes more relevant as one goes down the list, but what's relevant is not what he wants to talk about. He loves fluff, because fluff is easy to argue for with that complacent shit-eating smirk he wears...
Sorry for the rant, he just represents everything that I hate that goes on in this country...
Yes, I must agree. I don't remember O'Reilly calling for a boycott of coke when they continued to use kobe as a spokesperson for sprite (isn't rape a bad example for the youth?). And where did this idea come from in the first place, who gives a damn for the SPOKESPERSON of a SOFT DRINK?!
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't the enlightened (snicker) (hill) billy talk about boycotting Bush for his preemptive strike based on lies? Why doesn't he talk about how the U.S. installed Saddam in the first place? Why? Because he loves the current government in which the rich are allowed to have all the tax breaks they want, billion-dollar-a-year oil companies are subsidized, and the hard-working lower classes and middle-classes foot the bill.
His call for the boycott of pepsi is just a blatant racist with his own agenda, why not a boycott of walmart for unfair employee wages, sexist promotion policy? Nike for sweatshops? The list becomes more relevant as one goes down the list, but what's relevant is not what he wants to talk about. He loves fluff, because fluff is easy to argue for with that complacent shit-eating smirk he wears...
Sorry for the rant, he just represents everything that I hate that goes on in this country...
He's an ASSHOLE
ReplyDeleteIs O'Reilly a Nazi? Just Asking
ReplyDeleteBy Robert Parry
June 3, 2006
If someone else had done what Fox News star Bill O’Reilly did the other day – malign American troops who fought in the Battle of the Bulge and at Iwo Jima – it’s hard to imagine how ugly the Fox News reaction would be.
Think of how vicious the attacks from Fox News and right-wing commentators were on Sen. Dick Durbin for citing FBI criticism of detainee abuse at Guantanamo, or the smears against Dan Rather and other journalists who helped expose the scandal at Abu Ghraib, or the ugly campaign to boycott the Dixie Chicks for criticizing George W. Bush.
If one of those “usual liberal suspects” had said something one-tenth as offensive as O’Reilly’s remarks, Fox News surely would have offered up one of its loaded questions, like “Is (fill in the blank) Anti-American or Just Blinded by Hatred of Our Troops?”
But it’s hard to imagine any comments as outrageous as O’Reilly’s loose talk about war crimes supposedly committed by U.S. Army forces fighting in Belgium and by U.S. Marines in the bloody battle at Iwo Jima.
On “The O’Reilly Factor” on May 30, O’Reilly floated the argument that the alleged murder by U.S. Marines of 24 unarmed men, women and children in the Iraqi town of Haditha in November 2005 was just par for the course in wartime.
“In Iwo Jima, in the Battle of the Bulge, Malmedy, all these things,” O’Reilly lectured his guest, retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark. “You’re a military historian. You know these happened. It happened in every war. It’s happened in every army. …”
When Clark protested – “you’ll have to show me and prove to me that there were ever any American soldiers in Belgium and Normandy or in Iwo Jima who murdered civilians” – O’Reilly countered with a smirk and a shake of the head.
“In Malmedy, as you know, U.S. forces captured SS forces who had their hands in the air, and they were unarmed, and they shot them down,” O’Reilly said referring to the Belgian town of Malmedy, which was fought over during the Battle of the Bulge. “You know that. That’s on the record, been documented. In Iwo Jima, the same thing occurred. Japanese attempted to surrender, and they were burned in their caves.”
But O’Reilly’s historical certainty was astonishingly misplaced. First, at Malmedy, the atrocity on Dec. 17, 1944, was the other way around: about 86 surrendering U.S. soldiers were massacred by German SS panzer forces in one of the most notorious war crimes on the Western Front.
O’Reilly had turned the U.S. soldiers from victims into war criminals, while transforming their SS murderers from war criminals to victims.
As MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann noted on his “Countdown” program on June 1, O’Reilly made the same mistake last year in using the alleged U.S. atrocity at Malmedy – the supposed killing of unarmed SS troops by American troops – to blunt concerns about the Abu Ghraib scandal.
Despite encountering demands then for a correction, O’Reilly was back abusing the facts of Malmedy on May 30, this time to dilute outrage over the alleged murders of civilians at Haditha.
When challenged about his error after his May 30 program, O’Reilly didn’t exactly apologize but instead insisted he was referring to supposed U.S. revenge killings after the Malmedy atrocity. But that wasn’t what he actually said. (Olbermann reported that Fox News later doctored the May 30 transcript to substitute “Normandy” for “Malmedy.”)
Odder still, O’Reilly apparently was familiar with the actual facts about the Malmedy massacre, having cited the case in a newspaper column on June 27, 2005. That version correctly had the SS murdering U.S. troops, but O’Reilly mentioned the massacre only to set up a moral equivalence between U.S. troops and the SS – and then went on to suggest that U.S. Marines murdered helpless Japanese.
“After German SS troops massacred 86 American soldiers at Malmedy in Belgium on Dec. 17, 1944, some units like the U.S. 11th Armored Division took revenge on captured German soldiers,” O’Reilly wrote, adding: “In the Pacific, relatively few Japanese prisoners were taken in the brutal island fights.”
Yet, O’Reilly provides no specifics or documentary citations to support these war-crimes charges against Americans. While it certainly is likely that some individual American soldiers killed surrendering enemy troops, O’Reilly seems bizarrely sympathetic to the fascist forces of Germany and Japan, responsible for tens of millions of deaths.
O’Reilly also engages in historical revisionism with his explanation that the small number of Japanese POWs at Iwo Jima and other Pacific battles is proof that U.S. Marines committed systematic murder. According to most historical accounts, the Americans wanted the Japanese soldiers to surrender but they chose to fight to the death.
O’Reilly’s historical smears against U.S. troops in World War II read almost like some pro-fascist rationalizations circulating on some ultra-right Web sites.
Indeed, if there were a Fox News network that applied Fox News standards against Fox News personalities like O’Reilly, there surely would be one segment with loaded questions like “Why Does O’Reilly Enjoy Smearing American Heroes?” or perhaps “Is Bill O’Reilly a Nazi?” Just asking.
Its the JEWS who are behind it all. No more!
ReplyDeleteJews are not behind anything! I came here from KOS and find the author of this blog post has hit the nail on the head concerning Bill O Reilly!
ReplyDeleteIn America and everywhere else... masses are easily moved by hate more than they are moved by love and compassion... those that move masses by hate cannot call themselves moral, no matter what they use to cover it up with, such as the defense of our own, as O'Reilly does and other biggots such as Hittler have done. And remember that sometimes hate does not come across as hate itself; only the good at heart can recognize it and reject it.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't matter what the issue is, o'really will do whatever he feels and say whatever he has to to get ratings. He's a "Bushwack" wanna be journalist, interested only is sensationalism and repeatedly hearing the sound of his own voice. If he was even remotely interested in what others had to say, he'd shut his mealy mouth and let them make their point and not interrupt them. He's a RETARD of the Highest Caliber. I specifically removed Fox News from my TV -- Just because of o'reilly. What does that tell you? O'really, o'reilly..Whatever!! You're an asshole!!!
ReplyDeleteThis thread is very, very old. But it is still relevant. I too live here in Delaware County. And I agree that pieces of excrement like O'Reilly should be seen for what they are. Disgusting, fascist, flag waving, nationalistic douche bags. Hey, someone's kid beat your kid up during lunch break at school? Hey, just kill the kid, and his parents, and all his relatives. That's what God and Jesus would do, right? They all deserve it, right? They are all "harboring" this terroristic kid. And if you don't see things this way, well, yo should just SHUT UP! You don't have any right to free speech, unless you're a rabid Christian jackass like our own Mike Marcavage who makes his supposed points using bullhorns.
ReplyDeleteI despise O'Reilly and everyone of his ilk. Assholes who thank Bush that there hasn't been another 9-11 because of his repressive and regressive policies. Well, guess what? I haven't had malaria during the four years during which I've been drinking tonic water. Must be the quinine, right?
Something tells me that if we sit by the river long enough, we'll see the body of our enemy come floating by.
ReplyDeleteOlbermann is the biggest asshole I've ever laid eyes on. And you leftists? FUCK YOU!
ReplyDeleteI would like to see Bill O'Reilly's do a sleep~over with Charlie Manson and talk about the politics of prison ethics and when the lights go out I want to hear him screaming eeeehhhhhhh....eehhhhhhhhhhhh.
ReplyDeleteBill O'Reilly is a pig in sheep's clothing and the world would be a far better place with his feet in a jar.
I was born in Delaware County. Although I never met him, my uncle was one of the soldiers killed in the massacre at Malmedy. Regarding Billo, I wish he could listen to others who might just know something about a subject upon which he has no knowledge, instead of shooting his mouth off like the idiot he is.
ReplyDeleteo reilly is a crazy
ReplyDeletewhat know him....