digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

O’Reilly Claims that U.S Torture = Anti-American Propaganda

thinkprogress.org — Last night on the O ’Reilly Factor, host Bill O’Reilly and guest Laura Ingraham slammed Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for declaring in Berlin yesterday that the U.S. will “reject torture and stand for the rule of law.” “Enough is enough with this torture nonsense,” O’Reilly whined, declaring it “rank anti-American propaganda”.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • slifty, on 07/25/2008, -7/+73Its times like this that I wish facepalm hadn't been abused to the point that it doesn't mean anything anymore.
    • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -41/+4THREE....count them, 3 terrorists got waterboarded. Too bad. They should have killed them in the field but they decided to bring them to justice for being involved in the World Trade Center bombings and attack on the World Trade Center with airplanes on 9/11/2001.
      • baldick, on 07/26/2008, -1/+18Go dip a rag in water, put it on your face for a couple of minutes while continuing to poor water on it and then come tell us if you still think waterboarding is "too bad" or justified even on ONE single person, ass
      • stealthc, on 07/26/2008, -2/+14That's three too many.
      • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -2/+151) No matter how guilty somebody is, they deserve a fair trial. Then they can be punished AFTER a jury finds them guilty.
        2) Torture is NEVER a justified punishment. Even if the person in question tortured somebody, if you torture them it makes you absolutely no better than they are. If you want any kind of semblance of morality, torture is wrong, it doesn't matter who it is.
        3) This is assuming any of those involved in the tortures were at all involved in the world trade center attacks, which is unlikely in Iraq, but regardless cannot be proven without a FAIR TRIAL.

        3 people tortured is still a reprehensible crime against humanity AND should be spoken out against. One single person being torture is unacceptable, and should be a grave crime.
      • luciofulci, on 07/26/2008, -1/+9Regardless of your stance on torture, it violates what was stated in the geneva convention.
      • twistaspliff, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2You watch too much Faux "News". 9/11 was an inside job, and everything that followed was based on that lie so the criminals running the USA could extract 3 trillion dollars out of the country's wealth, and spread it around with their friends. Go back to sleep.
    • somestranger26, on 07/26/2008, -4/+28………………..,-~*’`¯lllllll`*~,
      …………..,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,
      ………,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,
      ……,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.
      ….;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll
      …..lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/………;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,
      …...lllllllllllllllllllll,-*………..`~-~-,…(.(¯`*,`,
      …….llllllllllll,-~*…………………)_-..*`*;..)
      ……..,-*`¯,*`)…………,-~*`~.………….../
      ……...|/.../…/~,…...-~*,-~*`;……………./.
      ……../.../…/…/..,-,..*~,.`*~*…………….*...
      …….|.../…/…/.*`......……………………)….)¯`~,
      …….|./…/…./…….)……,.)`*~-,……….../….|..)…`~-,
      ……/./.../…,*`-,…..`-,…*`….,---…...…./…../..|……...¯```*~-
      …...(……….)`*~-,….`*`.,-~*.,-*……|…/.…/…/…………
      …….*-,…….`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*……….|.,*...,*…|…...
      ……….*,………`-,…)-,…………..,-*`...,-*….(`-,…
    • Inohavehalos, on 07/26/2008, -2/+15Lets look at it again: They were attacking obama for bringing up the "most hated steriotype in america..."

      1.) Would you rather he not address the situation AT ALL?
      2.) He said we DIDN'T torture. Fox fails at trying to find things wrong with obama. They really do.

      Fuuuuuck you bill O'rielly, I'll be DOIN IT TO YOUR MOM LIVE!
    • jabberwolf, on 07/26/2008, -9/+1"***** you Bill O'reilly ?"

      For what?
      Seriously are you guys ***** retarded?

      Obama is saying "we will reject torture and stand for the rule of law"
      Bill is very correct - when someone stands up and claims that we should be against something...
      That means that "something" is being done - Which OBAMA has no evidence for.

      We all know what Obama is alluding to, so yes it is propaganda. And YES Obama is bringing this up and pandering to ANOTHER country. To show that OBAMA will lead the way against something that he brings up.

      Um ok, I AM AGAINST OBAMA's WIFE DOING THE MAILMAN. THIS WILL BE SOMETHING WE WILL BE AGAINST!

      What does that imply? That she's doing the mailman!

      Get it? So Bill has a pretty dammed good right to accuse Obama of creating propaganda.
      • notanidiot, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4So if Abu Ghraib wasn't torture, and waterboarding isn't torture, at what point does it stop being propaganda and start becoming torture.

        Here's the point. When America is hated, we become less safe. Other countries know that we torture, so they hate us. Obama's saying this isn't anti American, its anti bush, and it aligns with the views of our own citizenry, and the rest of the world.

        As far as having no evidence, come on... head out... out of the sand, where have you been? There's pictures, documents and testimony. What do you want, video?
    • rpgmaker, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Bill O'Reilly is just nuts, I'm telling you. I refuse to think that they (conservative media) really think that everything has been good in this administration. If it was for Bill and the likes this administration would pass as any other one, as if several civil liberties weren't infringed. I believe that in the bottom he is a smart guy and spread this lies for a living, seriously. He refers to the left as 'America haters'. He thinks that every time you say something that is wrong within the American government you're being anti-American... He is the kind of people that drag revolutions and entire movements down.

      And I don't know how anyone in America takes him seriously after this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O%27Reilly_(comm ...

      We will always remember Bill.
  • jbenson2, on 07/25/2008, -80/+14Obama made it sound like everyone in the US military was engaged in torture.
    • slifty, on 07/25/2008, -7/+52Did he actually or are you blowing steam? When you make a claim like that about a publicly available speech, it is wise to reference the quote to which you are referring directly, thus enabling others to come to their own conclusion while taking your statement into account.

      You have presented the hypothesis poorly and added noise to the conversation. Furthermore you have helped to polarize things through miscommunication on a hot topic.

      So yeah, sauce please.
    • dagnabbit, on 07/26/2008, -9/+32Hey ***** what speech did you watch?
    • Apokalyps2547, on 07/26/2008, -6/+32You didn't actually HEAR the speech, did you? You just listened to Rush Limbaugh's review of it.
    • lateralus, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5Typical neocon parrot. No concept of evidence or fact.

  • Insightful, on 07/25/2008, -7/+85Does O'Reilly support torture if America soldiers or civilians that were captured? Can we torture O'Reilly and his cohorts?
    • damonic, on 07/26/2008, -3/+23Watching O'Reilly get tortured on Fox News would be the only thing that could get me to tune in...
    • omegared, on 07/26/2008, -1/+9ya it does make sense how can America claim they care about human rights, speak up when other country's torture, yet than go torture people? if America does torture they can not claim they are better than other countries in regards to torture till they stop this practice.
      • tehknotte, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2what the heck you make it sound like America has made it it's job to torture people from other countries in other countries.
    • tehknotte, on 07/26/2008, -7/+2It's funny how you're making fun of him for saying it is anti-American propaganda, and yet your statement is quite Anti-American, wanting to torture other Americans.
    • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -7/+1Do you have any idea what insurgents do to captured soldiers and contractors? They don't water board them or tough talk them......they murder them. They cut their heads off or throw them in fires and video tape them being burned alive. Don't even try to compare torture both ways, it doesn't work that way, not in this conflict.
    • jabberwolf, on 07/26/2008, -7/+2Can we torture liberals who basically do ***** NOTHING to help this country?

      I mean there are people who fight, and there are people that sit back preach peace as cowards while they have people defending them.

      They would not be sitting so dammed pretty were it not for the brave defending them. Now that sounds like a bunvh of patriotic crap but its pretty dammed accurate for how the world works.

      The real heroes are the ones that fight because they know what is right.
      And they do so regardless of all the retards and criticism they get from the losers in life that sit back and let others create their lovely lifestyles.
      • sodade, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1***** you buddy. When, in the last 60 years has the US military done one ***** thing that actually benefited the people? The US military are just thugs hired by corporatist traitors.
      • sodade, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Digg it down all you like, but you are just a pussy who can't back up your *****.
      • 98percentcogdis, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Yes< they are hero's, in the sense that they put their lives on the line when they are deployed infantry. And many of them are young, so young as to be quite naive when signing up. Not many of them have researched the real reasons that the US government was itching to have permanent military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq, and Iran btw. So, yes, very much heroes, that should be honored. But I agree with sodade. If you research all the wars that the US has involved itself in, as far back as WW1, you would have to agree that, while cleverly disguising the true motivation behind each war, in order to "sell" it to the American public, our government has been the slick propagandist. WW2 was just about over when FDR sent American troops in. If he would have stayed out of it the war would have been over much sooner. Haven't you ever wondered why we would have communist Russia for an ally? There is a reason, but you will never find out what that reason in History 101, you have to look deeper. What do you think of the fact that the USA has permanent military bases in over 130 countries? What do you think of the USA supporting Israel in spite of the Apartheid Israel is committing against the Palestinian people? These are all questions that you have to ask yourself instead of waving the American flag and blindly believing that anyone that criticizes the foreign policy of their country is anti-American. The other thing that I have noticed is that anyone that is not happy about this administration and their foreign policy decisions has been labeled as a liberal. I am probably more conservative than all of the people on digg that are involved in this name calling, yet, I'm against this illegal occupation, I'm against this administration for infringing on the constitutional rights of due process and many other constitutional rights that have been taken away from YOU. We live in a country that is governed by a constitution. Bush violated it and so did Congress when they deferred the decision to go to war to the Executive Branch of the government, the list goes on and on... the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, all just ways to bring the US citizens closer to the new world order that the elites envision.
  • TrevorBelmont, on 07/25/2008, -11/+37Bill O'Reilly says lots of crazy things. He is a professional troll. Why do we continue to call him out on this stuff when all it accomplishes is carrying his nonsense to a broader audience?
    Let's be productive and keep the O'Reilly chatter on the subject of his sexually harassing and assaulting his female producer or on his childish and obscene "off air" freak outs.
  • wynja, on 07/25/2008, -5/+74Since when has denouncing torture become anti-American? I say do people like Bill exist in the real world? Surely this man cannot be so stupid. He must just be acting this ***** out. There is no way he can truly believe that denouncing torture is un-American.

    I mean by his very words. Vietnamese soldiers whom tortured McCain are more American than Obama. Does that make any sense to you?
    • sk11, on 07/26/2008, -3/+16He makes a good living out of being a neo-con mouth piece, I'm sure his masters pat him on the head and feed him doggy biscuits too. He's just like the tabacco company lawyers/lobbyists, who were lying through their front teeth about the effects of smoking. There's no mystery.

      It's the people who believe the crap he spews you have to really wonder about.
    • KeirGordon, on 07/26/2008, -16/+3It's not anti-american to denounce torture. It is on the other hand anti-american to denounce america to a crowd of people in another country. Why is it so hard to see the difference?
      • StarlessKnight, on 07/26/2008, -1/+8Ah, ah, excuse me. Excuse me, sir! *Sheepiesh raise of hand* But, uh, isn't the Freedom of Speech an American value?

        /Was there a recent Amendment to the Constitution stating the only Free Speech is speech that is neutral or praises America and/or its leaders?

        Anti-American is an American aiding and abetting the enemy. They have a name for that in the Constitution: Traitor. Speech, alone, however does not constitute aiding the enemy to a degree necessary to call them a traitor. It might be enough to use that in a trial in order to prove they are a criminal, however. Speech is Free, but that doesn't absolve you of consequences if it's used improperly (inciting riots, yelling fire, conspiracy, etc). Criminal != Anti-American.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/26/2008, -1/+10How is saying we will defend the rule of law and not torture people denouncing America?

        He was actually really nice about the whole thing and didn't call anyone out. Such as all the people who still deny anything happened when it did. Which is also known as telling a bold faced lie.

        He was talking about America moving forward, and what he would like to see the country become. It's laughable that you're offended by the simple fact that we have not recently lived up to the standard he sets for us and then blame HIM.

        You're a joke.
    • tehknotte, on 07/26/2008, -6/+1I don't think he is saying denouncing torture is anti-American, but rather making a big stink out of what the army does to get information. There are too many people who think they know all about war and have a critique. It gets annoying, is what I think Billo was trying to say.
    • EarlOfLade, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3You have no idea how many real life Limbaugh and O'Reilly copies I have met, they are plentiful and easy to find.
  • dupswapdrop, on 07/25/2008, -7/+27Waterboard O'Reilly! then Taser him!
    • sk11, on 07/26/2008, -4/+14He'd probably just enjoy it on a sexual level.
      • baldick, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6we'll make the safe word "FLŰGGÅƏNK∂€ČHIŒβØL∫ÊN,"
      • DaHuuuuuudge, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2@baldick
        And it's suicide if he never says the safeword, right?
  • mummbleswers, on 07/26/2008, -5/+34Urge to kill...rising...
  • donshi, on 07/26/2008, -6/+23Anti-American? What's more American than torture?
    • JoeVet, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Would that be Bill-O himself?
    • kyyled, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2Let's not jump to conclusions here...if anyone would know rank propaganda when he sees it, it would be Bill.
    • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3Wal Mart
    • KingGorilla, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3The flag bikini
  • LoveWidescreen, on 07/26/2008, -37/+9This is -- what? -- the 20th article from HuffPo, ThinkPro, and such sites just today. WTF?! Yet put up any kind of anti-Obama, pro-McCain, or pro-Bush article up and I'll bet that it gets buried into oblivion with zero chance of hitting the front page.

    And you people slam Fox News for being imbalanced? Total hypocrisy.
    • soot, on 07/26/2008, -5/+26Uh, digg is a user-run site with user-generated front page content, Fox News isn't.
      • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -3/+2*****, the majority of front page articles are from a single digit percentage of Digg users. Love is right, this is total hypocrisy, having the thoughts of a few crammed down the throats of everyone else.
    • lonehunter01, on 07/26/2008, -4/+19It's not hypocrisy if they aren't claiming to be fair and balanced.
    • Murrabbit, on 07/26/2008, -3/+18There are very few pro-Bush or pro-Fox articles out there these days, and rightly so. You'd do well to pay attention to the world around you and figure out just why that is.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -21/+6Up until today stories that were pro McCain, pro Bush, pro Republican and anti Obama were getting published daily on Digg but they do not get dugg up. Too many liberal haters at Digg. I'll be back in three weeks if you are interested and are a Republican supporting McCain.

        http://quadzeroroute.blogspot.com/
      • nblsavage, on 07/26/2008, -4/+10Quad, do us all a favor and stay lost....putz.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -16/+3***** yourself savage
      • nblsavage, on 07/26/2008, -4/+10yeah I love you too.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -16/+3http://digg.com/users/nblsavage/friends/view

        You've got less than 12 people who care about what you say, less than 12 friends since the middle of 2006 so I really don't measure what you have to say with much authority.
      • nblsavage, on 07/26/2008, -2/+11And I give a crap what other people think? Life isn't a popularity contest you schmuck but for the record, I have 420 fans, I'm just selective about who I friend.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -13/+2It isn't that you care what other people think it is that other people do not care much for what you think. That is the difference. Most of the people that I have befriended, befriended me and I reciprocated. That is how I got them. Being pro McCain and Republican got me those friends.

        And if life isn't a popularity contest then why is Obama preaching to 200,000 Germans in Europe. Seems that is all Obama knows.
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -14/+2Total 446 friendships...210 additional people that I did not reciprocate with a friendship because they are not Republicans supporting McCain

        http://digg.com/users/QuadZeroRoute/friends/befrie ...

        And 200 folks read my news daily. I pump it out at 10:30AM and they jump on it.

        Enjoy your liberal Digg fest.

      • nblsavage, on 07/26/2008, -4/+8insecure much sunshine?
      • QuadZeroRoute, on 07/26/2008, -10/+2You back here posting about being insecure? Talk to you later.
      • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -3/+8Perhaps he is speaking to 75,000 Germans in Germany because he actually cares what other countries think? It's a novel concept, I know, but working with other countries to get things done is a great way to be loved by the world.

        Unless you think our current trade deficits, economic plunge, war economy, and general hatred around the world is a good thing. Which you might, that is your decision, just saying.
      • kayala, on 07/26/2008, -2/+7Olbermann put it well today when he noted that maybe, just maybe, not having other countries hate us anymore is a GOOD THING. We're not at war with the whole damn world!
    • Apokalyps2547, on 07/26/2008, -3/+17We're not claiming to be journalists. We're private citizens with opinions.
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -1/+7So what you are saying is that there is a large group of people that support Obama and don't like Bush?

      No really? That's the great thing about a social run news site, it actually shows what the people want. Not what Fox News tells you the people want.

      Fancy that.
      • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -4/+2What the people want? What a small group of bleeding heart liberals want is more like it. If the United States was as you just described it then John Kerry and Al Gore would have won in Landslides.
    • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1I agree 100%, couldn't have said it better myself.
  • mearom, on 07/26/2008, -7/+12So many people watch FOX, and only FOX, and just take it as the truth. This is the real tradegy. Same thing with Rush Limbaugh. This is just a grain of sand in the ocean.
    • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2I watch CNN and Fox, because they take events and report them as they happened and then they draw their own opinions of them. CNN typically taking the left side and Fox usually taking the right side. Theres always two sides to any story, people have to remember that.
      • raeshao, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Only two?
      • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0well, i'd watch more but i'm afraid my head would explode.
      • Makave22, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Heh, I would say there is commies, fascists, anarchism-capitalists, social anarchists, individualists, libertarians, even Nazis. Not a two side, really. The media won't reports them because of their revolutionary aspect that will make media lose it power.
  • michaelarana, on 07/26/2008, -8/+9O'Reilly is a professional dumbass, and it goes to show you the bs he puts out!
  • Murrabbit, on 07/26/2008, -3/+23That's just the way the guys at Fox work - anything negative that happens as a result of their preferred party's policies (say like people being very upset with the fact that we torture detainees in violation of both our own law, international treaties and war crime law), then it just didn't happen. Not only did it not happen but anyone who keeps talking about it is anti-American.
  • soot, on 07/26/2008, -3/+16I remember being told about how the US does not torture its foreign prisoners like it was a code when I was little, and whenever I was reminded of wars I would think about it often and be really proud just at the very idea. Now its like nobody gives a *****.

    Don't know what Bill is thinking, but I thought it was a traditional American principle to, you know, oppose torture.
  • hellahyphy, on 07/26/2008, -2/+4I'm not surprised.
  • BonersMilloy, on 07/26/2008, -2/+8Even if they are extremely conservative how can someone stand any of the diarrhea that comes pouring out of O'Reilly's mouth on a daily basis.
  • LongBong, on 07/26/2008, -8/+10O'Reilly is a ***** prick, so is that ***** woman. I want both their asses waterboarded. Then we can talk about how we Americans don't torture. ***** A i can't stand these ***** neo-con facists
  • 223Sniper, on 07/26/2008, -6/+10***** that ***** *****.
  • nunu4u, on 07/26/2008, -23/+6That comment of Obama's got a big cheer. Some Europeans love to hear the US dissed and Obama obliged them. What a pol.
    • mummbleswers, on 07/26/2008, -3/+15Where do I start? Have you read any of the comments above? Saying torture is a bad thing is not dissing the US, it seems to be a matter of common decency and about 200,001 people agree with that.
    • soot, on 07/26/2008, -0/+9How the ***** is it a diss to try and make your country and its image abroad better by opposing systematic military torture? That logic is ass-backwards to me.
      • shewy, on 07/26/2008, -9/+1'Torturing' terrorists to gain information about other terrorists is bad? If a captured terrorist knew about a plan fly a plane into a building where a family member of yours worked, would it be good or bad for the military to try and retrieve information to prevent the plan from happening?
      • WasabiBomb, on 07/26/2008, -0/+7shewy, torturing ANYONE, for ANY reason, is bad. Period, full stop, end of sentence, close the damn book.
      • soot, on 07/26/2008, -0/+7There are some things that are a bedrock of our constitution, regardless of how we feel about them. The notion that the United States unconditionally does not torture its prisoners of war speaks volumes about our character as a nation and our reputation for following the rule of international law, and our own.

        There's no reason to undermine it by putting it in quotation marks, it doesn't make the tactics being used by the military any less valid. Waterboarding was classified by our own military and government as torture when it was used by the Japanese and Nazi Germany during WWII. Nothing has changed since then.

        Many intelligence analysts and interrogators in the FBI and CIA have claimed repeatedly that there isn't even any solid evidence that torture works. One of the biggest cases for this cited is the Al Qaeda captive who produced the "evidence" under CIA torture in 2001 that Saddam Hussein's regime had supplied Al Qaeda with WMD knowledge and capacity. He admitted to lying about that years later of course, after the CIA had called his credibility into question.

        If there were evidence to support your '24' scenario and show that military torture has saved lives, that might change alot of minds.

        Besides, after WMD fell through the floor all the Bush apologists were saying it was right to invade because Saddam tortured.
    • tufftugg, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4call the waaaaaaaaumbulance.
    • jaxcs, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3Lots of people in America also want torture stopped. Imagine that.
    • zibox, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1dissed?
  • Mrdudeperson, on 07/26/2008, -8/+8You may not agree with him, but it is his opinion. What people forget about The O ’Reilly Factor is that it is an opinion based show. It is not meant to give you the news in a only fact based way. There are 2 types of journalism, fact based and opinion based. You may disagree with him but don't say that The O'Reilly Factor, or Fox News in general, doesn't give you the facts.
    • BotchaMcCoola, on 07/26/2008, -6/+3Not necessarily. Anyone with this kind of job could be tempted to say silly things like that to get more attention.
    • staeiou, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6You're right, I don't agree with his opinions. But we do have the right and the duty to speak out against opinions we think are bad. That is all politics is, really.
    • brbubba, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4I have yet to find a US news organization that deals in the fact based coverage of which you speak.
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -0/+5Except he claims his show to be a spin-free zone where he speaks the simple truth, nonpartisan.

      Of course it is the exact opposite of that, it is full of spin where he speaks his opinion in a highly conservative manner that favours Republicans. I would NOT begrudge him that at all if he just admitted to it, he has every right to have an opinion show where he discusses his beliefs if he wants to. Keith Olbermann's show is much the same, but with a liberal slant. Olbermann, however, doesn't claim his show to be the straight facts (always, sometimes he does do basic journalism).

      The issue I have is that he claims his show to be unbiased fact, which is just a lie. That is the biggest issue I have with them, because the viewers of his show believe that what he says IS unbiased facts.
  • skews13, on 07/26/2008, -7/+3listening to billo, and laura ding a ling, is torture. that should make them eligible for arrest by the international court.
    • STARR15, on 07/26/2008, -3/+0Why do you watch FOX if it bothers you? United Nations wants you to join the Peacekeepers. You get a Shiny Blue UN helmet and a fake gun. Or become the International Court Jester with free Healthcare.
  • LuCiFer6, on 07/26/2008, -6/+13Why do people still listen to Bill'O The Clown?
    • WasabiBomb, on 07/26/2008, -2/+7Because there are quite a few people out there- primarily people who voted for Bush in the last two elections- who think that everything he says is God's honest truth.
    • JamesBrown, on 07/26/2008, -2/+3I'm a liberal. I watch Bill O'Reilly's show because he is entertaining. That's the only reason. That's the only reason anybody watches anything.

      Of course I agree with folks like Olbermann more, but Olbermann's show is so boring and stale that I just can't stand it. O'Reilly may be a blowhard and a jerk, but he keeps it fresh. In fact being a blowhard and a jerk is part of why the show is so successful
      • kayala, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2Eh, I tend to get annoyed with BillO's show a couple minutes in and switch over to Olbermann's. I find I'm more captivated by an analysis of reality than the ravings of a madman (who likes those falafel things).
      • tehknotte, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Oh Tobias
  • filldeviant, on 07/26/2008, -8/+14Sweet Jesus I hate Bill O'Reilly.
  • staeiou, on 07/26/2008, -3/+21Torture goes against everything America is supposed to stand for. Anyone who supports torture is spouting anti-American propaganda.

    Also, I find it amusing that the "respect the rule of law" talking point which was so passionately yelled by conservatives during the immigration debates is being dismissed by conservatives when it comes to torture.
    • shewy, on 07/26/2008, -5/+1'Torturing' terrorists to gain information about other terrorists is bad? If a captured terrorist knew about a plan fly a plane into a building where a family member of yours worked, would it be good or bad for the military to try and retrieve information to prevent the plan from happening?
      • WasabiBomb, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5I just heard that shewy knows about terrorists who are planning to fly a plane into a building! Of course, he's going to say he doesn't know anything, but I guess we'll have to force him to tell us the truth...

        THAT'S what's wrong with torture, shewy.
      • StarlessKnight, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5“What if what they really want is for us to herd our children into stadiums like we’re doing? And put soldiers on the street and have Americans looking over their shoulders? Bend the law, shred the Constitution just a little bit? Because if we torture him [a suspect], General, we do that — and everything we have fought, and bled, and died for is over. And they’ve won. They’ve already won!” -- Anthony Hubbard, The Siege

        How far do we go? Torture a known terrorist... torture a possible terrorists... torture someone related to a terrorist... torture someone related to a possible terrorist... What do we do with the Justice system? Justice is only for Americans? What happens if Americans become terrorists? Justice is only for good Americans? What's a good American? What's a terrorist? Who defines these groups and how do they decide on the objective criteria? Who enforces the criteria? Under what conditions do the criteria change?
      • staeiou, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4Bad. I was about to chime in with the obligatory, "You haven't met my mother" joke, but I'll be serious. First off, it is more likely for a member of my family to be mistaken for a terrorist on faulty intelligence and tortured without any recourse than it is for a member of my family to die in a terrorist attack. Now, assuming that the person captured actually is a terrorist and knew about a plan to fly a plane into a building well enough in advance for us to stop it (please give me a scenario when something like that ever actually happened), why would they tell U.S. officials? U.S. Marines and other top military agents go through torture training, and I'm sure these people do too. They'd probably "give up" after a little while and give false information to throw everyone off.

        Besides, how do you threaten someone who is not only ready, but willing to die a gruesome death? Many see their torture and execution as martyrdom and know that they will live on in some kind of afterlife if they die fighting.
      • tehknotte, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1To the people digging down shewey: what would you do? Haven't you guys seen 24? Sometimes terrorists are hard-headed and it takes different techniques to get to them.
      • goldisalie, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0The point is that torture is a well proven means to get useless information from prisoners. The CIA knows it, the army and whoever is likely to be interrogating prisoners should know it, should they contain half a brain cell. If you torture a man who truly knows nothing, you are likely to obtain completely useless information from him just to get you to stop. If you torture a man who really does know something you are just as likely to get useless information from him as well.

        Since when was torture a reliable way to tell if somebody is lying or not?

        That and it is morally reprehensible. Do you stand for any sort of morality or are you just braying for a flag? Do you love your country for what it stands for or simply because it is the place you are from? If it is the latter then what does that mean?
      • notanidiot, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1tehknotte, thank you for invoking the "its just like on TV" concept. 24 is fiction, fun to watch cool fiction, but still fiction. Why doesn't 24 show them waterboarding? They seem to always save the day on 24 with no waterboarding.

        Your point proves nothing, except that the mentality of the complacent citizen is relative to how much they see TV as reality. Turn it off, man.
  • IpsoPhatso87, on 07/26/2008, -2/+13The truth is, at the very heart of what America is supposed to be about, believing and following the U.S. Constitution, BillO is one of the most anti-American people in the world.
  • SpyDerMann, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5Sometimes I really wonder if THAT many people believe in the bullcrap that FOX news is. Perhaps they're just fooling themselves by thinking "people believe in us!"

    Just a thought.
    • brycelb, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1I wonder the exact same thing about Huffington, thinkprogress, and rawstory.
      • WasabiBomb, on 07/26/2008, -1/+2And yet none of those think torture is a good idea. Congratulations on picking the wrong side.
  • themonkman, on 07/26/2008, -2/+23Watching "The O'Reilly" factor is torture. I'd rather have my nipples attached to commercial high voltage power lines.
    • Ebonsteel, on 07/26/2008, -0/+14Hey, don't knock it; some GOP Senators and Congressmen pay a lot of money to have that done to them! :D
    • kreegah, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Can't you just see B O'R and Rove sharing a prison cell? Which would be the wife, or would they take turns? I would add more about them running their hands over each other's blubbery, sweating bodies and murmuring endearments, but some of you might have just eaten.
      • themonkman, on 07/28/2008, -0/+1It would give Bill O' some good time to practice his falafel fetish, for sure!
  • rudeboyskunk, on 07/26/2008, -1/+10I've said it before and I'll say it again: the day Bill O'Reilly chokes and dies, party at my house.
  • thegrantman, on 07/26/2008, -0/+6What torture? Bush redefined it as a non-consensual massage.
  • MasterThief117, on 07/26/2008, -8/+3You know, I am going to try to play devils advocate here and hope I don't get buried, but if I do, so be it. I tried.

    Anyway, the people in captivity have some information we are looking for. How else are we going to get this information? Giving them cookies? Doubtful that will work. Torture seems like the only way to extract information. We are not the only country that does it. In fact, every country at one point or another has tortured war prisoners for information at some point. The information they have could end up saving many lives in the future.

    • justiceape, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4The problem, and I don't mean to be offensive, is that our common notion of what torture gets you is fiction. 24 is a fictional show, but this is what most of us have as context when we think about torture. The "ticking bomb" scenario is dismissed as ridiculous by experts in interrogation. The most blunt thing I can tell you is that the Army did studies on torture, and simply decided they weren't going to do it because it didn't get reliable information. Torture doesn't even work, that's the scary part. A tortured person will say whatever is necessary for the torture to stop. That obviously has little to do with what is true and what is not.
      • MasterThief117, on 07/26/2008, -4/+1Interesting. What you said does make sense, but when you look at it from the stand point that if they torture multiple people who are in on the same thing, the people torturing would figure out who is not giving reliable information.
      • WasabiBomb, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3So are you volunteering to be one of those guys who're going to be tortured? 'Cause I guarantee you, there's at least one guy in there who doesn't know anything- and if he gets tortured, we've just tortured an innocent man.
      • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3so torturing potentially innocent people to figure out who isn't innocent is a viable interrogation method?

        I understand what you are saying really, and it seems reasonable, but you have to draw a line somewhere. Torture is inherently wrong, even if every other country does it, it doesn't make it right. A large reason for this is you cannot verify that the person you are torturing is guilty of anything without a fair trial by our standards.
      • MasterThief117, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1So, lets say we did try them and they were found guilty. Then what? Then we know they have information. How else can we get that information?
      • malex, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1There are considerable volumes written about this very subject, MasterThief117. You might consider reading some by Frank Gibney, who was a interrogator during World War II.

        His son, incidentally is the filmmaker Alex Gibney, who directed "Taxi to the Dark Side." Any America who is asking the questions that you were just asking really should see this film.
    • JoeVet, on 07/26/2008, -2/+2And what makes you any different from them? When you adopt their values and act as they do then you are no better. The United States was founded on the principle that we can do better. And we have maintained our high ideals even when faced with enemies who do atrocious things. It wasn't until Bush and the neo-con revolution that our founding ideals were tossed aside for expedience. Ultimately your argument is the argument of a coward. You would rather sacrifice the reputation of our nation, one maintained by the blood of those who came before, so you can sleep better.
    • StarlessKnight, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2We're torturing people. Faceless, nameless people to us. A statistic in so far as we, as outsiders to the system, are concerned, but people all the same. They have rights. They have basic, Human rights. They have the right--or damn well should have the right--to the same justice system that any American has in order to prove their innocence; if the Military has a better system of determining someone's guilt than our judicial system than maybe they should share the secret because we have innocent people on Death Row and in Prison right now.
  • ArchangelZLT, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6What Fox News says can't be more irrelevant... Any educated person will stay away from it so its audience never understands anything it said.
  • djdingo, on 07/26/2008, -1/+9My friend's two roommates recently signed up for the Navy. He told me one of them was offered the opportunity to work at Gitmo and "work with" the detainees. His job was to "belittle the detainees as much as possible". Basically torture them without the military using the word "torture".

    He turned down that position and is now in limbo until the military finds him something else to do.

    So even if the media tells you otherwise, torture is STILL happening and it must be stopped.
    • shewy, on 07/26/2008, -5/+0'Basically torture' - LOL!
      • STARR15, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0That is a Flat out lie. They don't offer Navy personel to go to Gitmo to torture make fun of the detainees. Your friend's two roommates do not exist. Get a better friend.
  • Renian, on 07/26/2008, -3/+11The O'Reilly Factor is "anti-American propaganda." What a tool.
  • vrich187, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5Irony-Bill talking about propaganda like its a bad thing when its his specialty.
  • scubajim, on 07/26/2008, -12/+3It is too bad most diggers lack critical thinking and observation skills. He wasn't saying that being anti-torture is anti American. He was saying that the US military has an excellent track record then it comes how we treat POW's. Have there been some incidents? Yes, there is no denying that there have been a couple of incidents.(eg Abu grabh) Is that bad? Certainly. What O'reilly is sick of is the synchopant pandering to the Anti-American groups. (eg European popular sentiment - they don't vote for our President, moveon.org etc.)
    • brbubba, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4This wasn't an anti-american comment, he didn't disparage the US. This was a policy statement of what US policy will be under his potential presidency.
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2I think people misunderstand what Anti-American means.

      If you criticize something, it does not mean you hate it. To use the fantastic late Dr. Pausch's words, the critics are the ones who still care about you. If you criticize something, it is because you KNOW it can be better. It is a sign of love. Criticizing America, calling out America's fault is the true patriotism.

      If anything, the anti-americanism here is the people who say that you can't critique America without being a traitor. When did criticizing equate to hatred? Our founding fathers understood this, they supported our right of free speech and our right to assemble specifically because of this. Critiquing America isn't anti-American, it's our very duty as Americans to do so. So speaking out against torture, even if it was a single isolated incident in our otherwise pristine military history, which I'm not saying is true or false, is still an important duty that MUST be done. Critique America because you love it and want to see it become better for it. If you just keep your mouth shut and say "Yay, I love America" then America will never become an even better nation.
  • justiceape, on 07/26/2008, -2/+3First, O'Reilly says we don't torture that much. Then Ingraham says we don't torture. I think they need to update their White House talking point propaganda memos because they're not in sync.

    This is the total insanity endpoint the elite-backed media has to propagate, trapped in its own rhetoric. We don't torture is like saying the sky is ***** red. It's an insane statement. But they have no choice but to stand by it. Will we swallow the ***** when it's gotten this bad? So far it seems yes. That's okay, things will get much much worse, so don't worry, we'll have plenty more to get upset about.

    Also, if you think Barack Obama is going to fix any of this, you are ***** delusional. He certainly was second choice to Hillary, but he's just another managed horse the elite put in this race, to trick us into thinking we made an actual, legitimate choice based on meaningful alternatives. If there is one thing that marks a person as naive, it's holding a politician to his words rather than his acts. Obama's acts are not encouraging. Voting for retroactively de-felonizing wiretapping? That's not even the tip of the iceberg. Wake up.
  • shewy, on 07/26/2008, -7/+3'Torturing' terrorists to gain information about other terrorists is bad?
    • justiceape, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4The Army seems to think so:

      http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/polic ...

      "PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF FORCE

      The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is prohibited by law and is neither authorized nor. condoned by the US Government. Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear. However, the use of force is not to be confused with psychological ploys, verbal trickery, or other nonviolent and noncoercive ruses used by the interrogator in questioning hesitant or uncooperative sources.

      The psychological techniques and principles outlined should neither be confused with, nor construed to be synonymous with, unauthorized techniques such as brainwashing, mental torture, or any other form of mental coercion to include drugs. These techniques and principles are intended to serve as guides in obtaining the willing cooperation of a source. The absence of threats in interrogation is intentional, as their enforcement and use normally constitute violations of international law and may result in prosecution under the UCMJ.

      Additionally, the inability to carry out a threat of violence or force renders an interrogator ineffective should the source challenge the threat. Consequently, from both legal and moral viewpoints, the restrictions established by international law, agreements, and customs render threats of force, violence, and deprivation useless as interrogation techniques."
    • dagnabbit, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4Yeah, it is. Where the ***** have you been?
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Yes, you don't know if you are accidentally torturing an innocent man. Torture somebody and they will confess to anything, whether or not they even did it.

      read: Salem Witch Trials.
    • goldisalie, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0As I replied to your earlier post, 'information' gained through torture is by definition dubious since it came from torture. What on earth gives you the idea that you can get reliable information directly from the mouth of your enemies? That is not intelligence gathering, and no intelligence agency worth their salt would consider this kind of information as useful.

      Torture as it is used in Guantanamo is an act of psychological warfare. It is purely intended to demoralise and frighten the enemy rather than gather any meaningful intelligence. I would go so far as to say they use it to scare off would be joiners too, given the high levels of inmates with tenuous links to any sort of real terrorist group. Sort of like saying: "don't even think about it"
  • ThinkIcouldburn, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6I Claim O'Reilly is a *****.
  • artfiend77, on 07/26/2008, -1/+13Obama isn't making America look bad abroad, Bill O'Reilly is.
  • Bologner, on 07/26/2008, -0/+6I hate O'Reilly, but they missed a few words in there that I find changes alot of the argument.

    "This torture ON A MASS SCALE garbage is rank, anti-American propaganda" is what he said. He didn't say we WEREN'T torturing, he said it was happening as much as some people say it is.

    Granted, any torture is too much.
  • thorstrongstone, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4I would take this seriously, but why should I when whatever O'Reilly utters is irrelevant *****? I mean, does anyone take his oral queefing seriously?
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1My entire family, myself included, hangs on his every word and owns numerous O'Reilly merchandise.
      • thorstrongstone, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Do you own the O'Reilly lunchbox, with the ultrasonic douche and the picture of Goering?
  • krnldmp, on 07/26/2008, -2/+1I honestly think some people are so afraid American sanctimony might exist that they don't realize it couldn't be real without them. I'm not saying O'Reilly is in that camp, just be aware of what you're actually dealing with before you get angry. The problem could be larger.
  • crackberri, on 07/26/2008, -9/+2Why aren’t you Nobamas quoting when Hussein said he would still vote against the surge even though it is working… What a SFN!
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4You know, if you keep saying the surge is working, I bet somebody will believe it.

      Because force is the best way to create peace, right?
  • stealthc, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4The fact that there's any ambiguity on this topic is evidence already that the US lost the moral high ground a long time ago.
    • wunksta, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1agreed
    • tufftugg, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1 Just with us who are not American, not sure how you guys feel about it...well, except the Republicans who are in denial to any reality.
    • nekama, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1We've got a long way to go (in the downward direction) before we're moral peers with Peking.
      • stealthc, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2Both are governments. Both are deadly monsters. I understand that they have differences in degree, but in principle, I consider them nearly identical.
  • UnknownHero, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3I saw the broadcast and this is a pretty gross mischaracterization of what he said.
  • any1particular, on 07/26/2008, -0/+4When it comes to Fox News Channel, conservatives don't feel the need to "work the ref." The ref is already on their side. Since its 1996 launch, Fox has become a central hub of the conservative movement's well-oiled media machine. Together with the GOP organization and its satellite think tanks and advocacy groups, this network of fiercely partisan outlets--such as the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and conservative talk-radio shows like Rush Limbaugh's--forms a highly effective right-wing echo chamber where GOP-friendly news stories can be promoted, repeated and amplified. Fox knows how to play this game better than anyone.
    • nekama, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1Thus proving the need for a Fairness Doctrine to return.
  • tufftugg, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3 The Neocons are going mad with Obamamania...lol
    • bluesman3535, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1The political pendulum swings hard when fueled by incompetent arrogant fools. I'm no fan of Obama but it's easy to see a 6-8% win at this time.
      • 98percentcogdis, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1I have no idea why you are being dugg down. For once, the truth! I wish I could digg you up 100 times. My feelings exactly. Let's face it, this is the choice that we've been given. (as if they are laughing at us) Obama and McCain! For the first time since I turned 18, I am not going to bother to go to the polls, but I can assure you, Obama has it in the bag. Mc Cain is an insult to the Republican party!!!!
  • Springdaddy, on 07/26/2008, -8/+2***** the left. There is a reason why O'Reilly is most watched cable news show on TV. Why the hell has Digg.com become a far-left hippie love fest? This place is rediculous...

    • tufftugg, on 07/26/2008, -1/+6 lol...No I think people are starting to pull their head out of their azz, and going.."whoa, we REALLY are torturing people, and the World knows and has known". Seems the Neocon fear mongering is wearing off.
    • wunksta, on 07/26/2008, -0/+3seriously? oreilly is a puppet for the warmongering elite who are making money off us and the countries they invade.

      yay for fair and balanced news.
    • Dymphna, on 07/26/2008, -1/+3Olbermann has been beating O'Reilly in ratings recently, to be fair. Technically, doesn't that mean that the public as a whole prefers the liberal perspective now, if that was your argument?
      • ProUSADigger, on 07/26/2008, -1/+1Why would you even state something so plainly incorrect? Is your blatant
        lying caused by your complete ignorance of the facts or are you trying to propagandize to
        the other liberal uninformed teenagers who infest digg who you know will not take the time to actually do the research?

        Here are the facts regarding the ratings of O'Reilly and Olbermann:
        http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/oreilly ...
  • IH8PelicanFarts, on 07/26/2008, -1/+4How does this man A) have a job B) Have a loyal fan base?
    • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -2/+0Because most people who watch his show are intelligent, which is more than I can say for this website.
      • shinyplastic, on 07/26/2008, -0/+2And the only intelligent people are the people who share my opinions. I don't care what skills they have, unless they agree with me 100%, they're stupid.

        Are you 12?
      • jack104, on 07/26/2008, -0/+0Are you ***** me? This entire damn website is devoted to left wing *****, have you ever seen an article praising a good thing McCain has done, or President Bush? No this website is so horribly biased it's not even funny, so don't even talk to me about being closed minded or shut off because you and everyone else on this ***** bull website are exactly the same.
      • 98percentcogdis, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Not true! I am a conservative. What do you want people to praise him for? If there was something, I'd love to give him praise. I voted for the man, not once, but twice! I'm embarrassed to say that. You have to let us know what he has done that is praiseworthy! Is it the illegal wiretapping?
      • IH8PelicanFarts, on 08/09/2008, -0/+1Jack104 - I am not a citizen of your wonderful Aameerrika. I am merely an educated outsider observing the internal destruction of a powerful country. O'Reilly is being paid well for being an aggressive media mogul. Your country has lost its way and has been controlled and swayed by influential big business. The oil executives have a stronghold over your country. It is saddening to see such a glorious and powerful country disintegrate over a very short number of years. As far as McCain goes..... well I don't have enough time. Unfortunately the candidates are chosen by big business and not the American people. You will have to make the best choice you can from what is offered to you. In the end, no matter how great they seem, they're still politicians.

  • STARR15, on 07/26/2008, -6/+0Why do you watch FOX if it bothers you? United Nations wants you to join the Peacekeepers. You get a Shiny Blue UN helmet and a fake gun. Or become the International Court Jester with free Healthcare
    • wunksta, on 07/26/2008, -0/+1because its just another obvious example of the propaganda machine and its chokehold on the us.
  • beerock, on 07/26/2008, -1/+5I'm really proud of O'Reilly, for someone so pitifully, mentally incapacitated to continue to fight the good fight, takes an admirable amount of courage.
    I admire you, Bill, you steaming, nutty, pile of *****.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.