-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Clash of the titans: Michael Moore Vs. Bill O Reilly, tonight.
- Thread starter Hamfam
- Start date
- Status
mjq jazz bar
Banned
Why'd you stop posting at OA, Sonic?
MrAngryFace
Banned
I will predict:
Bill: Welcome to the show mr moore, first off, I just wanna know why. Why would you make a film that could cause our troops to die?
Moore: Well Bill I think you'r....
Bill: Let me tell you what I think BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Moore: No listen, I....
Bill: Cut his Mic, this is bullshit, oh and fathers day is only a year a way, buy copies of my shit book and coffee mugs.
Bill: Welcome to the show mr moore, first off, I just wanna know why. Why would you make a film that could cause our troops to die?
Moore: Well Bill I think you'r....
Bill: Let me tell you what I think BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Moore: No listen, I....
Bill: Cut his Mic, this is bullshit, oh and fathers day is only a year a way, buy copies of my shit book and coffee mugs.
IntestineBoy
Sasquatch of 1000 (hairy) colons
Here is a transcript of the interview, from Drudge
Moore: Thats fair, well just stick to the issues
OReilly: The issues alright good, now, one of the issues is you because youve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butlers investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didnt tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didnt lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, thats not a lie.
M: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage
O: That would be a lie because we could see that wasnt the truth
M: Well, Id have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasnt true actually its president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a
O: Ok, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president
M: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie
O: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine
M: But that was your question
O: Just the issues. Youve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying British intelligence, US intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, he lied. This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious
M: Well, thats almost pathological I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test
O: Alright, now youre dancing around a question
M: No Im not, theres no dancing
O: He didnt lie
M: He said something that wasnt true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources
M: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldnt listen to anybody
O: They wouldnt go by Russian intelligence and Blairs intelligence too
M: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said What you got on Iraq? and Richard Clarkes going Oh well this wasnt Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.
O: Youre diverting the issue did you read Woodwards book?
M: No, I havent read his book.
O: Woodwards a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?
M: I know who he is.
O: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, slam dunk if youre the president, you ignore all that?
M: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.
O: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.
M: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldnt communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didnt have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th
O: Nobody disputes that
M: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a slam dunk and your going to go to war.
O: Youve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because theyre all saying the same thing thats why. Youre not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.
M: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I cant think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war, I mean, I dont know a worse
O: It wasnt a lie
M: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?
O: I call that bad information, acting on bad information not a lie
M: A seven year old can get away with that
O: Alright, your turn to ask me a question
M: Mom and Dad it was just bad information
O: Im not going to get you to admit it wasnt a lie, go ahead
M: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question
O: OK
M: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?
O: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say. We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.
M: And, but what were they killed for?
O: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war, to remove a brutal dictator
O: Well were back to the weapons of mass destruction
M: But that was the reason
O: The weapons of mass destruction
M: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat
O: Thats right
M: And there was no threat, was there?
O: It was a mistake
M: Oh, just a mistake, and thats what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, Were sorry. I dont think that is good enough.
O: I dont think its good enough either for those parents
M: So we agree on that
O: but that is the historical nature of what happened
M: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?
O: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional
M: No, not intentional, it was a mistake
O: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that
M: Really, Im driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead
O: If it were unintentional and you werent impaired or anything like that
M: So thats all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake how would you feel towards me
O: Ok, now we are wandering
M: No, but my point is
O: I saw what your point is and I answered your question
M: But why? What did they die for?
O: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: No, that was not the reason
O: Thats what they died for
M: -they were given
O: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake
M: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world
O: Alright, Ive got anther question
M: Would you sacrificejust finish on this. Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?
O: Depends what the circumstances were.
M: You would sacrifice your child?
O: I would sacrifice myselfIm not talking for any childrento remove the Taliban. Would you?
M: Uh huh.
O: Would you? Thats my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?
M: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.
O: Al Qeada was given refuge by the Taliban.
M: But we didnt go after themdid we?
O: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qeada.
M: Thats why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.
O: OK, well look you cant kill everybody. You wouldnt have invaded Afghanistanyou wouldnt have invaded Afghanistan, would you?
M: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.
O: How?
M: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Osama was
O: Why was that?
M: Thats my question.
O: Because Pakistan didnt want its territory of sovereignty violated.
M: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didnt go there. He got a two month head start.
O: Alright, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?
M: No, unless it is a threat to us.
O: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day longyou would have let him go?
M: Thats not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.
O: Beforefrom 33-until 41 he wasnt an imminent threat to the United States.
M: Theres a lot of things we should have done.
O: You wouldnt have removed him.
M: I wouldnt have even allowed him to come to power.
O: That was a preemption from Michael Mooreyou would have invaded.
M: If wed done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, woah, Im trying to stop this war right now.
O: I know you are but
M: Are you against that? Stopping this war?
O: No we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to
M: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.
O: I would sacrifice myself
M: Your childIts Bush sending the children there.
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You and I dont go to war, because were too old
O: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.
M: Say I Bill OReilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah
O: Im not going to say what you say, youre a, thats ridiculous
M: You dont believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?
O: Look its a worldwide terrorismI know that escapes you
M: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?
O: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.
M: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?
O: Iraq aided terroristdont you know anything about any of that?
M: So youre saying Iraq is responsible for what?
O: Im saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.
M: Youre not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.
O: Im not? Youre his biggest defender in the media.
M: Now come on.
O: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: If you were running the country, hed still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: You wouldnt have removed him.
M: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---
O: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.
M: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.
O: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.
M: The people rose up.
O: why? Because they went bankrupt.
M: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up
O: Alright alright.
M:--thats how you, let me ask you this question.
O: One more.
M: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You dont do it down the barrel of a gun. Thats not how you deliver it.
O: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam
M: Why didnt they rise up?
O: Because they couldnt, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off
M: well thats true in many countries throughout the world__
O: It is, its a shame
M:--and you know what people have done, theyve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. Theres many ways
O: Im glad weve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alrightand the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and thats the fair way to do it. Right?
M: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You wouldnt send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?
O: I would.
M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?
O: Thats right.
M: Wheres the recruiter?
O: Youd love to get rid of me.
M: No I dont wantI want you to live. I want you to live.
O: I appreciate that. Michael Moore everybody. There he is
Moore: Thats fair, well just stick to the issues
OReilly: The issues alright good, now, one of the issues is you because youve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butlers investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?
M: He didnt tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.
O: Yeah, but he didnt lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, thats not a lie.
M: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage
O: That would be a lie because we could see that wasnt the truth
M: Well, Id have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasnt true actually its president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a
O: Ok, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president
M: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie
O: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine
M: But that was your question
O: Just the issues. Youve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying British intelligence, US intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, he lied. This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious
M: Well, thats almost pathological I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test
O: Alright, now youre dancing around a question
M: No Im not, theres no dancing
O: He didnt lie
M: He said something that wasnt true
O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources
M: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldnt listen to anybody
O: They wouldnt go by Russian intelligence and Blairs intelligence too
M: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said What you got on Iraq? and Richard Clarkes going Oh well this wasnt Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.
O: Youre diverting the issue did you read Woodwards book?
M: No, I havent read his book.
O: Woodwards a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?
M: I know who he is.
O: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, slam dunk if youre the president, you ignore all that?
M: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.
O: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.
M: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldnt communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didnt have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th
O: Nobody disputes that
M: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a slam dunk and your going to go to war.
O: Youve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because theyre all saying the same thing thats why. Youre not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.
M: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I cant think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war, I mean, I dont know a worse
O: It wasnt a lie
M: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?
O: I call that bad information, acting on bad information not a lie
M: A seven year old can get away with that
O: Alright, your turn to ask me a question
M: Mom and Dad it was just bad information
O: Im not going to get you to admit it wasnt a lie, go ahead
M: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question
O: OK
M: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?
O: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say. We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.
M: And, but what were they killed for?
O: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war, to remove a brutal dictator
O: Well were back to the weapons of mass destruction
M: But that was the reason
O: The weapons of mass destruction
M: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat
O: Thats right
M: And there was no threat, was there?
O: It was a mistake
M: Oh, just a mistake, and thats what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, Were sorry. I dont think that is good enough.
O: I dont think its good enough either for those parents
M: So we agree on that
O: but that is the historical nature of what happened
M: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?
O: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional
M: No, not intentional, it was a mistake
O: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that
M: Really, Im driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead
O: If it were unintentional and you werent impaired or anything like that
M: So thats all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake how would you feel towards me
O: Ok, now we are wandering
M: No, but my point is
O: I saw what your point is and I answered your question
M: But why? What did they die for?
O: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people
M: No, that was not the reason
O: Thats what they died for
M: -they were given
O: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake
M: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world
O: Alright, Ive got anther question
M: Would you sacrificejust finish on this. Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?
O: Depends what the circumstances were.
M: You would sacrifice your child?
O: I would sacrifice myselfIm not talking for any childrento remove the Taliban. Would you?
M: Uh huh.
O: Would you? Thats my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?
M: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.
O: Al Qeada was given refuge by the Taliban.
M: But we didnt go after themdid we?
O: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qeada.
M: Thats why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.
O: OK, well look you cant kill everybody. You wouldnt have invaded Afghanistanyou wouldnt have invaded Afghanistan, would you?
M: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.
O: How?
M: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Osama was
O: Why was that?
M: Thats my question.
O: Because Pakistan didnt want its territory of sovereignty violated.
M: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didnt go there. He got a two month head start.
O: Alright, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?
M: No, unless it is a threat to us.
O: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day longyou would have let him go?
M: Thats not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.
O: Beforefrom 33-until 41 he wasnt an imminent threat to the United States.
M: Theres a lot of things we should have done.
O: You wouldnt have removed him.
M: I wouldnt have even allowed him to come to power.
O: That was a preemption from Michael Mooreyou would have invaded.
M: If wed done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, woah, Im trying to stop this war right now.
O: I know you are but
M: Are you against that? Stopping this war?
O: No we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to
M: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.
O: I would sacrifice myself
M: Your childIts Bush sending the children there.
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You and I dont go to war, because were too old
O: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.
M: Say I Bill OReilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah
O: Im not going to say what you say, youre a, thats ridiculous
M: You dont believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?
O: Look its a worldwide terrorismI know that escapes you
M: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?
O: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.
M: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?
O: Iraq aided terroristdont you know anything about any of that?
M: So youre saying Iraq is responsible for what?
O: Im saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.
M: Youre not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.
O: Im not? Youre his biggest defender in the media.
M: Now come on.
O: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: If you were running the country, hed still be sitting there.
M: How do you know that?
O: You wouldnt have removed him.
M: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---
O: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.
M: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.
O: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.
M: The people rose up.
O: why? Because they went bankrupt.
M: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up
O: Alright alright.
M:--thats how you, let me ask you this question.
O: One more.
M: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You dont do it down the barrel of a gun. Thats not how you deliver it.
O: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam
M: Why didnt they rise up?
O: Because they couldnt, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off
M: well thats true in many countries throughout the world__
O: It is, its a shame
M:--and you know what people have done, theyve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. Theres many ways
O: Im glad weve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alrightand the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and thats the fair way to do it. Right?
M: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?
O: I would sacrifice myself.
M: You wouldnt send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?
O: I would.
M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?
O: Thats right.
M: Wheres the recruiter?
O: Youd love to get rid of me.
M: No I dont wantI want you to live. I want you to live.
O: I appreciate that. Michael Moore everybody. There he is
MrAngryFace
Banned
no one died? pity.
Escape Goat
Member
If you get past how O'Reilly conducts himself and look at how hes trying to deal with the issue you'll be better off, whether his stance be right or wrong. But this thread is shortly about to become a flame fest where O'Reilly is made to be the Anti Christ.
MrAngryFace
Banned
I just hate him for peddling his crappy books and t-shirts on the show.
MIMIC said:
I doubt he really edited much. If he did, he knows Moore would bitch about it endlessly and say he's some kind of Nazi censor.
And I think that shows, because there are some parts of the interview that would best suit him if he edited it, but he obviously didn't judging by the transcript.
nitewulf said:
Did you read the interview. It isn't a lie when he acts on reliable intelligence from different sources all saying the same thing.
And Moore keeps harping on the fact that the president is killing our children. Moore doesn't see that they are grown up and fighting of their own free will.
nitewulf said:
Well, I think what he means is that they volunteered for service. It would be against their own free will only if they got drafted for Iraq and didn't want to go.
The military is an all volunteer service right now. They know that if they are called upon to do something they will do it.
The Promised One
Banned
olimario said:
Wow, I agree with Olimario about something.
Still though, reading that was painful. It was like two little kids arguing.
"You are!"
"No, you are!"
"No, you!"
"YOU!"
"Your mother!"
"No.....yours."
Chesapeake Silt
Member
Eh. Pity that they wasted half the interview in pointless semantic bickering over the word 'lie'. They both agree about what happened, but one insists it was a lie, and one insists it wasn't. JUST MOVE ON, JACKASSES.
All in all, not bad if you're a fan of the 'two guys yelling at each other' genre of news coverage.
All in all, not bad if you're a fan of the 'two guys yelling at each other' genre of news coverage.
First off, Bush did lie. I'm prepared to have a discussion on this. Moore could have nailed O'Reilly on this, and I think I know why (he had to play O'Reilly's game, where facts and information takes a backseat to putting pressure on the other speaker).
American troops don't have a choice...do you know how many we have in Canada just so that they can avoid serving in the Army?
They knew what might happen? Well yes, under the assumption that you would fight legitimate wars, and not bullshit ones, they thought they would be sent into harm's way when necessary.
Not just to make some rich people richer.
I think you are judging this as a debate. I'm not.
O'Reilly's show has nothing to do with logical and coherent debate. His show is all about speaking louder than the other person, asking them ridiculous questions, and trying to make them say ridiculous statements. In this case, Moore did all of that, on O'Reilly's own show! I consider that ownage to the max.
It's like calling someone out to your own turf, planning to beat the crap out of him, but then he does it to you. Note: the point isn't to "win" the arguement, the point is to make the other person uncomfortable and not able to answer your questions. O'Reilly repeatedly dodged Moore's attempt to get him to say he'd send his children to Iraq. He just couldn't get himself to say it, he was frozen like a deer on a highway at night with highbeams in it's eyes.
olimario said:
Being in the military is about protecting one's country. If I'm forced to fight for a cause, it better be something just and something I believe in and I'm sure many soldiers feel the same way too. These people are being sent to a war where no one quite sure knows the reasoning behind. Is that something worth dying for?
Soldiers aren't entirely there of their own free will....they sign up for service but they can't exactly just opt-out of Iraq if they don't wanna go or have some kind of objection to it. Not that the army should be run democratically, but a lot of the people that get into it are not really that educated or informed about what's going on....they just have a trust that their leaders will do the right thing, and some people feel that trust has been betrayed.
Is that the entire transcript or just a little bit?
Is that the entire transcript or just a little bit?
JoshuaJSlone
Member
The Promised One
Banned
Fight for Freeform said:
Big fat
on that one.Least I know to ignore you now.
How about this?
The president LIED based on BAD INFORMATION. The president was at fault. The intelligence sources were at fault. Perhaps even congress was at fault. What we have here was just a massive failure of government. The president needs to apologize, but so do a lot of other people. Some already have, but others refuse to give up their position lest it destroy their precious little political image.
Even a lie based on bad information is still a lie. It wasn't true. Sorry. If Saddam had weapons and he moved them, we should've know how and where. But, as we've already seen, we can't fully rely on our intelligence agencies.
Soldiers may be there of their own free will and I generally respect what they do (though there are bad apples - these are kids brought up with a lot of violence and testosterone, shit is bound to happen and it sucks, but there's still many that do a good job), but the reason for going there was changed mid-war. We *did* go for WMD. When we didn't find any, the reason for going to war was mysteriously changed to getting rid of Saddam, and only after the fact was the "Saddam/Al-Qaeda" link really pushed hard. So, over the course of a year, the reasons for going to war morphed several times, and its been found that the ORIGINAL REASON was a lie.
The president LIED based on BAD INFORMATION. The president was at fault. The intelligence sources were at fault. Perhaps even congress was at fault. What we have here was just a massive failure of government. The president needs to apologize, but so do a lot of other people. Some already have, but others refuse to give up their position lest it destroy their precious little political image.
Even a lie based on bad information is still a lie. It wasn't true. Sorry. If Saddam had weapons and he moved them, we should've know how and where. But, as we've already seen, we can't fully rely on our intelligence agencies.
Soldiers may be there of their own free will and I generally respect what they do (though there are bad apples - these are kids brought up with a lot of violence and testosterone, shit is bound to happen and it sucks, but there's still many that do a good job), but the reason for going there was changed mid-war. We *did* go for WMD. When we didn't find any, the reason for going to war was mysteriously changed to getting rid of Saddam, and only after the fact was the "Saddam/Al-Qaeda" link really pushed hard. So, over the course of a year, the reasons for going to war morphed several times, and its been found that the ORIGINAL REASON was a lie.
If Moore didn't "own" O'Reilly, then he at least owned the interview. He had the upper hand throughout that transcript, which is pretty cool. I expected him to be seriously damaged by O'Reilly.
And Olimario, ok, it wasn't a lie, because the intelligence, at the time, seemed reliable. But would you agree it was a mistake invading Iraq though?
And Olimario, ok, it wasn't a lie, because the intelligence, at the time, seemed reliable. But would you agree it was a mistake invading Iraq though?
Oh, you mean all the "reliable intelligence" that the UN weapons inspectors in alot of cases DIRECTLY discreditted? The same evidence, which was years old, and mostly circumstancial?
There was a REASON most people didn't think the WMD production existed, and didn't support the War.....guess what that reason was.
SolidSnakex
Member
olimario said:
Reliable intelligence can always be wrong. Which is one of Moore's points. You only go to war when you know they have something. We didn't know for sure, it's just sources said they had WMD's. While our own weapons inspectors constantly said they didn't have any.
The Promised One
Banned
olimario said:
Yeah, especially when libs (and I'm sorry, but it is 99.9% liberals) are bitching that 9/11 happened because Bush didn't pay enough attention to intelligence reports.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't, I guess.
First off, this person speaks the truth. Kids these days know what they're getting into when they join the military, and all of a sudden they're pussing out, along with their families, on wanting to fight in Iraq.
Also, must we forget that Clinton had a chance to kill Osama? We can't just blame Bush.
JMTC... I don't think the President lied, but it would be nice to hear an apology on behalf of the U.S. government for (however unintentionally) misleading the public. That's obviously not going to happen, though, as that would be an enormous boost to the Democrats in an election year.
Here's an attempt at an analogy. Plenty of people in this thread are referencing things that they only know because of news reports. If it turned out that the news reports were incorrect, I wouldn't dig up this thread and say "Ha! You're all LIARS!"... but I would blame the media for shoddy work. In a similar way, I blame the agencies of various governments for being so sure that finding WMD in Iraq was a "slam dunk".
Here's an attempt at an analogy. Plenty of people in this thread are referencing things that they only know because of news reports. If it turned out that the news reports were incorrect, I wouldn't dig up this thread and say "Ha! You're all LIARS!"... but I would blame the media for shoddy work. In a similar way, I blame the agencies of various governments for being so sure that finding WMD in Iraq was a "slam dunk".
- Status