Author:
Marie Tucker
[Edit]
|
Date Posted: 18:32:14 11/06/08 Thu
Dear Bill:
You were right on the money tonight 11/06/08 from Sarah Palin, Spike Lee and Saturday Night Live. This was the worst presidential campaign in history as far as I'm concerned. There was so much bad press about Sarah Palin, it made me very angry. She is very intelligent and down to earth. There was a lot of jealousy here, even in John McCain's camp. Spike Lee is a racist and always will be. I will never watch SNL again.. You were candid but fair in all of your broadcasts during the campaign. Thank you.
>I found this piece, supposedly written by you, on the
>web:
>
>"It's The War, Stupid By: Bill O'Reilly for
>BillOReilly.com
>Wednesday, Sep 10, 2003"
>
>*If you DIDN'T write it, please disregard the
>following. However, if you DID, I'd LOVE the
>opportunity to "step up", and debate you over the
>issues at hand. The following is a line by line
>dissection of your wrongness:
>
>For a country smack in the middle of World War III, we
>are certainly a blasîSunch.
>
>We're worried about how much fighting the people who
>want to kill us will cost and whether we have an "exit
>strategy" in Iraq.
>
>*Well actually, We just want to know when we can
>declare we¡¯ve 'won' the War. What has to happen so
>that we can declare a moral victory in this conflict?
>I mean who exactly do we have to kill, what capitol
>city do we have to occupy? What we want to know is,
>"What do we have to do to win?"
>
>Craven politicians and crazed columnists are second
>guessing President Bush who, at times, looks like he's
>first guessing the nation's foreign policy.
>
>*Name-calling accomplishes nothing, except to identify
>YOU as a 'name caller'.
>
>Since Mr. Bush, for some inexplicable reason, will not
>spell it out for you it falls on me to do so.
>
>*He CAN'T spell it out for you or me. (no pun
>intended) Because if everyone knew we were in the
>middle east to secure our economic needs, we wouldn't
>be there at all.
>
>There are around the world thousands of Islamic
>fanatics who want to kill Americans because they
>believe Allah is down with that.
>
>*There ARE in THIS country THOUSANDS of individuals
>who preach hate and violence against someone or some
>group. Some of them have bombed buildings and killed
>innocent Americans. But we don't 'dismantle' their
>organizations. We hold 'individuals' accountable for
>the crimes they commit. Look at how 'violent' the KKK
>has PROVEN itself to be. Its political jargon is no
>less vile, or "evil" than it was years ago, so why is
>IT allowed to exist still to poison young minds?
>
>These people are taught from the time they are
>children that Jews and Americans are undeserving of
>life on this planet.
>
>*So, what!? They 'think' there are evil people in the
>world, and that evil ways will lead to hell. Aren't
>YOU saying the same thing about them, right now? Who
>cares if I 'think' YOU don't deserve a T.V. show? It
>isn't until I ACT to rid you of it, that I am guilty
>of some crime. I thought Americans were FREE to read,
>learn, and THINK about anything they wish??? Are
>those who would paint the ¡°America¡± in a bad light,
>suddenly not allowed to do so? Since when is teaching
>people wrong things a bad thing?
>
>There is no negotiation with the most of these
>zealots; there is nothing one can say to dissuade them.
>
>*Dissuade them from what? THINKING the way they do,
>or ACTING they way they do? You see, the two are
>completely different pursuits. Indeed, there is
>nothing you can do to dissuade someone from THINKING
>something, but you CAN deter them from ACTING out
>those beliefs. If the kid reaches for the cookie jar,
>after you said no. Then you hit him hard across his
>knuckles with a wooden spoon. If he does it again,
>you cut his hand off and make stew out of it.
>Eventually the kid gets the idea, so he STOPS reaching
>for the cookie jar. However, in his head he still
>WANTS & desires the holdings inside the cookie jar.
>AND indeed, there IS nothing you can do to dissuade
>desire...
>
>They want blood and they will use any and all means to
>get it.
>
>*Well, they want 'specific blood', not just ANY blood.
> And indeed, they WILL use any means necessary.
>
>A number of nations help these killers and allow the
>murderous anti-American indoctrination to continue
>generation after generation.
>
>Iran, Indonesia, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are the most
>threatening to us, although the Saudis do have some
>pro-American government officials like Prince Bandar,
>its ambassador to the United States.
>
>*WAIT a second, hold the truck! You can't just name
>off a few countries and especially gloss over Saudi
>Arabia like that. "Anti-American indoctrination to
>continue"...? What does that mean exactly? I mean is
>there ANYTHING about America that isn't 'perfect'?
>And if a father tells his son in China, that to desire
>the life of a billionaire is folly, does THAT fit your
>depiction, of ¡°generational indoctrination¡±?
>MOREOVER, you didn't even mention what Saudi Arabia
>really represents, in this global formula. Look, I am
>going to break it down for you- We get cheap oil from
>a Monarchy in the Saudi Family. The common people are
>taught hate toward America, and oppression toward
>women, but they want to throw off the shackles of this
> Oppressive Monarchy. We are literally guarding the
>palaces and oil fields in Arabia,. However our oil
>needs are oblivious to the masses needs therein.
>Osama bin Laden was cast OUT of Arabia because of his
>fighting for the rights of the common people, and in
>so much receives much support from the common people
>in the region. 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi
>Arabia, and if you'll read the 9-11 Commission report,
>you can see where the country "Saudi Arabia" was
>blacked out. And WHERE is North Korea on that list???
>
>Iraq used to be a terrorist enabler primarily by
>helping the homicide bombers kill civilians in Israel
>but Saddam Hussein was open to causing trouble for the
>USA however he could.
>
>*I'd like you to provide ANY evidence that Saddam EVER
>attacked us directly. Not liking us and invading a
>neighboring country years ago, isn't exactly an
>¡®imminent threat¡¯ today, now is it?
>
>The Islamic killers thrive on the Palestinian
>situation. As long as the Palestinians are denied a
>state of their own, the propaganda machine that
>demonizes Israel and America will roll along
>unchallenged in the Arab world.
>
>*They "thrive"...? Is this like saying that
>anti-inner-city initiative republicans "thrive" on
>seeing low test scores, that allow them to close down
>schools? OR are you saying that 'some people' just
>love to fight, and will do so anytime they see an
>injustice or conflict arise? I just don't understand
>your complete line of thought there...
>
>So the only way to break down the hatred many Arabs
>have toward us is to forge a Palestinian-Israeli peace
>agreement that both sides can live with.
>
>*Actually, this is only PART of the problem, and even
>if we succeed in doing so there will still be
>anti-American sentiments alive and well.
>
>In order for Israel to cooperate in this effort fully,
>it needs to feel secure. Having the Americans in Iraq
>helps that effort.
>
>*How the hell do you feel secure in the tender-box
>that is the middle east, during WWIII??? You DON'T.
>Since we have been in Iraq, how many bombing has
>Israel suffered. is that number greater or smaller
>than the number BEFORE the invasion and occupation?
>
>Also, the USA needs a democratic outpost in the Middle
>East to put pressure on the terrorist states of Iran
>and Syria.
>
>*I'll give them this, an 'artificial target' in the
>middle east isn't necessarily a bad idea, but it will
>NEVER be a democratic outpost. At best, we will only
>manage a danger gas station.
>
>A foothold in that region makes it infinitely more
>difficult for Al Qaeda to carry out its evil doing.
>
>*Actually, it HELPS them to garner support, because
>they have evidence in their very country that we are
>not only invaders, but occupiers.
>
>Just the huge CIA presence in Iraq alone, gives the
>USA a major advantage in learning about terrorist
>operations before they hurt we the people.
>
>*I think you are wrong. You can't stop someone will
>to give their life for a cause if they are properly
>motivated and trained. ALL that you can hope to do is
>catch them, and try NOT to allow them to repeat an
>attack.
>
>This nonsense about the United Nations rescuing
>America in Iraq is something Aesop would have
>published.
>
>*Hey, when you wanna take on the world, and defy its
>global institutions, then you gotta put up, or shut
>up. WE said WE were going with or without the UN into
>Iraq. Now mis-planning, and improper public relations
>has us somewhere we don't want to be, alone. If
>someone DOESN'T help us, we will not succeed.
>¡°¡rescuing¡¡± is EXACTLY what we need.
>
>The UN is a chaotic chamber with no sense of urgency
>about terrorism and no sympathy towards the USA.
>
>*Could or would you apply that sentiment to the U.S.,
>in regards to the needs of other nations, also?
>Meaning that WE are a member of that chaotic chamber.
>Do you mean to say that WE don't have a sense of
>urgency about the terrorist attacks that occur, say in
>Ireland?
>
>Now some of that antipathy might be justified but not
>when American lives are at stake.
>
>*They ARE at stake. American lives are at stake each
>day, but not from terrorist attacks. A brief look at
>the numbers show us to be in far greater danger from
>car accidents caused by drunk drivers, than almost
>anything else, besides Cancer. I mean in the last 10
>years, less than 5,000 people have been victims of
>international terrorism. Last year alone 18,000
>innocent people DIED from drunk drivers. What are we
>actively doing to save those lives next year, aren't
>THOSE lives "at stake"???
>
>In a perfect world, all countries that aid and abet
>terrorism would be isolated and embargoed. But this is
>far from a perfect world.
>
>*This is NOT a perfect world, that I agree with.
>However, I DISAGREE with you, in that I think that
>even if we DID manage to force everyone to think like
>us, we would have only created a more imperfect world.
>
>The failure of France, Germany, Russia and China to
>aggressively help America neutralize terror states is
>an outrage of historic proportions. France is the
>worst.
>
>*Okay, if everyone in the world thinks you are wrong,
>but you think you are right, what does that make you?
>I mean, if you weighed the People's Opinion in the
>U.K. you'd see that they aren't with us either. In
>fact, HALF of America isn't with you. So if ALL these
>people,(I hesitate to say 75% of the world) are
>against you, what makes you think you are right???
>"...neutralize terror states"...? What if I told you
>that many nations view the U.S. as a terror state?
>
>The Chirac government lied to Secretary of State Colin
>Powell about enforcing the UN resolution demanding
>Saddam cooperate with the weapons inspectors.
>
>*It would seem that lies are not an uncommon thing to
>anyone anywhere.
>
>Then France actively undermined both the war and the
>occupation. President Bush should level with the
>American people about the duplicity of France and, to
>a lesser extent, Germany.
>
>*So you want our leaders to actively work to further
>separate ourselves from life long allies...? With all
>due respect, "You are an idiot." We live in a global
>community, we can't afford to shun neighbors who can't
>move.
>
>I know this would cause an uproar by what the French
>have done to hurt America and Israel is unconscionable.
>
>*"..unconscionable..."...? Okay, YOU don't get to use
>that word! Everything is conscionable. We lock
>people up in this country for smoking cannabis as
>medicine, and then federally subsidize tobacco farmers
>to be THE leading cause of Cancer in this country.
>When it comes to economic gain, ANYTHING is
>conscionable.
>
>At the same time, the Bush administration must begin
>earnestly persuading nations that are not overtly
>hostile to us that we don't want to dominate the
>world, we want to make it safe for everyone.
>
>*No, we DO want to dominate the world, And we want to
>use our military to unbalance the free market, by
>aligning ourselves in strategic locations that insure
>us access to cheap oil and labor. It isn't really
>global domination, but rather global market
>manipulation.
>
>Finally, World War III is unlike any war in history
>and mistakes will be made in the fighting of it.
>
>*Ahem, mistaked HAVE been made, and will continue to
>be made. Just hope that YOU aren't one of the
>causalities.
>
>The Bush administration has the correct global view
>regarding terrorism but poor communications skills
>both within the country and abroad.
>
>*"...poor communication skills..."...? Don't you mean
>they LIE, and hide their real agendas?
>
>The sad truth is that most people don't even know that
>World War III is underway and have little
>understanding of the strategies and stakes.
>
>*The sad truth is that too many Americans get their
>'news' from entertainers like YOU. The sad truth is
>that although we are the free-est nation in the world,
>we are also the most ignorant and uninformed.
>Americans don't see the world outside of their
>immediate environment, and have little to no concept
>of the international world or market. Look, I am a
>well-informed, partially educated, fully informed,
>Patriotic American. 'I' know that my Liberty and
>Freedom are only in danger from those citizens who
>would trade Liberty for Security. America isn't a
>building or a person. It is an idea, and ideas can't
>be defeated. We are Free, to think, read, and write
>whatever we want. The only people who can take away
>these Freedoms are Our Lawmakers, and they can¡¯t do so
>with our authority and approval.
>
>But believe me, you and your family are in danger. We
>must stop the partisan bickering and acknowledge that
>brain-washed fanatics have us in their sights.
>
>*The only sincere danger we Americans face has already
>struck me. I am in a wheelchair now, for the rest of
>my life, because of a drunk driver. And 'I' think YOU
>are the "brain-washed fanatic" that we should all be
>cautious of.
>
>And this time there's no Geneva Convention and no
>limits on deadly weaponry. This time there is no "exit
>strategy."
>
>It's us or them.
>
>*Hey, all that I have to say is that when you or
>anyone else comes into MY home, then we have a
>problem. And if ever you DO try to come into MY home,
>I've already got your "exit strategy" waiting for you.
> Keep reaching for the cookie jar, my friend, and
>pretty soon you are gonna come back without an arm.
>
>---
>
>THIS is why I DON'T watch "the Factor" with any kind
>of regularity. You'll go off on a mis-characterizing
>spiel, and 'program' a bunch of dumb wannabe beltway
>intellectuals, to think like you. Then you refuses to
>allow anyone 'qualified' to rebut your findings. I
>have written scores of letters and e-mails to you,
>asking & pleading for the opportunity to "step up" and
>debate you. I'll bet I've been doing so for at least 2
>years...and in return NOTHING. Not a single word in
>response to what must be a mounded pile of paper
>outside your offices. My rule is that if you don't
>respond, I don't watch or listen. F-you, you coward,
>and God help your mindless minions.
>
>King,
>North Texas
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
|
