Jump to content
The Education Forum

Bill O'Reilly chews up Fetzer

Brendan Slattery
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pat Speer Grand Master

Pat Speer

Posted
Posted
"O'Reilly was rude to a certifiable nut! How dare he!"

Um, you have watched his show before, right? Fetzer knew he wasn't there to play pattycake. Fetz is leveling some pretty serious charges, and O'Reilly cross-examined him quite devastatingly. The ex-professor did nothing but stammer, plug his website, and fade into a catatonic trance when challenged. It was almost as good as Groden on the witness stand in the OJ civil suit. That's what happens to the nuts when they leave their comfort zones. They fall apart under the weight of their own hubris. Nor is it particularly libelous to describe Fetz as an "anti-American loon." Why is it so hard to believe that there are Islamic jihadists in the world who wish the US and the West nothing but death and destruction?

We agree on this point, Brendan. It's not at all hard to believe there are plenty of Islamic Jihadists in the world who wish our death, particularly when the public faces of this natiion are men like Bush and O'Reilly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Stapleton Newbie

Mark Stapleton

Posted
Posted
"O'Reilly was rude to a certifiable nut! How dare he!"

Um, you have watched his show before, right? Fetzer knew he wasn't there to play pattycake. Fetz is leveling some pretty serious charges, and O'Reilly cross-examined him quite devastatingly. The ex-professor did nothing but stammer, plug his website, and fade into a catatonic trance when challenged. It was almost as good as Groden on the witness stand in the OJ civil suit. That's what happens to the nuts when they leave their comfort zones. They fall apart under the weight of their own hubris. Nor is it particularly libelous to describe Fetz as an "anti-American loon." Why is it so hard to believe that there are Islamic jihadists in the world who wish the US and the West nothing but death and destruction?

Your last sentence is a good example of the media's presumptuous dishonesty concerning the so called war on 'Islamofacists'.

Islamic jihadists have a problem with America and Israel and the close allies of this axis, like Britain and Australia, unfortunately.

The 'west' is commonly added to widen the issue and create an 'us against them' mentality. Many western countries don't support the aggression of the US and Israel.

Most people in these countries don't support the US presence in Iraq. Why does the media imply that they have a stake in joining disputes they want no part in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ron Ecker Enthusiast

Ron Ecker

Posted
Posted
O'Reilly's "you're a traitor for questioning the moral integrity of the President" is a sham and most everyone knows it.

It works, it shuts people up. Both sides use it. I vividly remember the TV commentator Mark Shields (don't know if he's still around because I've quit watching TV "news" and "commentary" altogether) defending Clinton from accusations he was involved in the Vince Foster death. Shields' indignant but reasoned and persuasive defense of Clinton: "ACCUSING the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES of MURDER!!!!!" That was it. Whoever the cohort was he was talking to of course sat there nodding his head in agreement at this logical rebuttal to the accusations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David G. Healy Collaborator

David G. Healy

Posted
Posted (edited)

'Ron Ecker' wrote:

O'Reilly's "you're a traitor for questioning the moral integrity of the President" is a sham and most everyone knows it.

It works, it shuts people up. Both sides use it. I vividly remember the TV commentator Mark Shields (don't know if he's still around because I've quit watching TV "news" and "commentary" altogether) defending Clinton from accusations he was involved in the Vince Foster death.

dgh: he's still around, 6PM-Friday, PBS. Still does a 10 minute commentary segment with a Repub columnist. Sheilds and ?????? segment.

Shields' indignant but reasoned and persuasive defense of Clinton: "ACCUSING the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES of MURDER!!!!!" That was it. Whoever the cohort was he was talking to of course sat there nodding his head in agreement at this logical rebuttal to the accusations.

Edited by David G. Healy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bernice Moore Newbie

Bernice Moore

Posted
Posted

Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government

Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report

Many respected senior members of the U.S. military, intelligence services, and government have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. Some even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. Below are the highly revealing statements on this vital topic of over 50 prominent public servants with links for verification and further investigation.

The collective voices of these respected senior officials give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These dedicated individuals from both political parties cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report is not only reasonable and responsible, it is in fact a patriotic duty

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquesti...ommissionreport

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Terry Mauro Newbie

Terry Mauro

Posted
Posted

O'Reilly is an asshole jerk who never served in the military, while

Fetzer was a Marine Corps officer in Vietnam.

O'Reilly called Fetzer a TRAITOR, but it is Fetzer who is a true hero

and O'Reilly a coward.

O'Reilly shouted, screamed and became nearly apoplectic while

repeating several times YOU ARE NUTS, while showing a vast

lack of information about 911. Fetzer remained calm and tried

to present facts between O'Reilly's rude rants.

O'Reilly showed himself to be a rude, ignorant, asshole jerk,

while Fetzer comported himself with calm class.

Naturally everyone here understands why Slattery worships

O'Reilly. Two peas from the same pod.

Jack

Well, you hate this country too, Jack, so you and Fetz can spoon to your heart's content. Accusing the Prez of murdering 3,000 innocent people is indicative of "calm class"? And you think this reflects well on the Marine Corps? What is his idea of "experts"? Those pimple-popping twits from Loose Change? Hilarious. Thankfully, I know an asshole when I see one (or read their posts). Just remember folks: you won't read any of Fetz's shocking revelations in the Bush-hating NY Times or Nation magazine because they're influenced by the evil gum'mint! LOL.

************************************************************

"Thankfully, I know an asshole when I see one (or read their posts)."

Well, apparently you haven't taken a good look at yourself in the mirror lately have you, Clyde? :pop

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dawn Meredith Newbie

Dawn Meredith

Posted
Posted

O'Reilly is an asshole jerk who never served in the military, while

Fetzer was a Marine Corps officer in Vietnam.

O'Reilly called Fetzer a TRAITOR, but it is Fetzer who is a true hero

and O'Reilly a coward.

O'Reilly shouted, screamed and became nearly apoplectic while

repeating several times YOU ARE NUTS, while showing a vast

lack of information about 911. Fetzer remained calm and tried

to present facts between O'Reilly's rude rants.

O'Reilly showed himself to be a rude, ignorant, asshole jerk,

while Fetzer comported himself with calm class.

Naturally everyone here understands why Slattery worships

O'Reilly. Two peas from the same pod.

Jack

I concur wholeheartedly. I see O'Reilly sometimes when I am surfing the news stations. I even agree with him at times. When all the people were doing the number on Christmas I agreed with his position. (I suppose all Christians would agree). But when it comes to 9-11 I totally agree with the 9-11 scholars for truth, of which Fetzer is one. Admittedly it took me a good two years or more to come around to this viewpoint. It was very hard for me to think that the administration allowed this to happen. But then I began to take a look at the evidence. And it all points in one direction. Three thousand were expendible to accomplish the evil aims of PNAC. Disgusting, disgraceful and people ARE catching on to this truth.

I predict that it is this that will cause the net to become censored. Of course they will not tell us the reason; it will be clothed in some noble notion of protecting children from child predators. Which is a great concern of mine. I have two beautiful granddaughters.

We cannot allow them to take the net from us. They've already totally dismantled the Constitution.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frank Agbat Newbie

Frank Agbat

Posted
Posted
...

I predict that it is this that will cause the net to become censored. Of course they will not tell us the reason; it will be clothed in some noble notion of protecting children from child predators. Which is a great concern of mine. I have two beautiful granddaughters.

We cannot allow them to take the net from us. They've already totally dismantled the Constitution.

Dawn

Dawn,

You may very well be correct. There are many folks who say that we are living *right now* in the "golden age of the Internet." They theorize that in the future, regulation, profit, greed, spam, viruses, censorship, and any number of other things will creep up to render the future 'net a shell of its former self. Somehow, "security" will enter the equation.

I argue that we have already passed the Zenith and are heading downward as we speak. It would be nice to think that the proverbial genii is out of the bottle. However, I think that might be underestimating the people's (or should I say "sheeples") willingness to sacrifice freedom for "security." I'll take my chances on freedom, thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Len Colby Rookie

Len Colby

Posted
Posted
O'Reilly is an asshole jerk who never served in the military, while Fetzer was a Marine Corps officer in Vietnam.
Jack is once again misinformed IIRC Fetzer served stateside and in Okinawa, he never saw combat and never went to Nam.

I agree about O'Reilly though, he and Fetzer made quite a pair of blowhards.

Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government

Officials Question 9/11 Commission Report

Many respected senior members of the U.S. military, intelligence services, and government have expressed significant criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report. Some even allege government complicity in the terrible acts of 9/11. Below are the highly revealing statements on this vital topic of over 50 prominent public servants with links for verification and further investigation.

The collective voices of these respected senior officials give credibility to the claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is tragically flawed. These dedicated individuals from both political parties cannot be simply dismissed as irresponsible believers in some 9/11 conspiracy theory. Their sincere concern, backed by decades of service to their country, demonstrate that criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report is not only reasonable and responsible, it is in fact a patriotic duty

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquesti...ommissionreport ://http://www.wanttoknow.info/official...mmissionreport ://http://www.wanttoknow.info/official...mmissionreport

But many if not most of the reject the theories of the "'truth' movement" even the Commission chairs admit the report was flawed
I think the O'Reilly hijinks will backfire. While I don't subscribe to the 9/11 hoax theory, O'Reilly's behavior was abominable. If Clinton looked foolish for getting mad on TV, O'Reilly looked twice as foolish. He made Dr. Fetzer, not always the coolest of cucumbers, appear quite reasonable. Perhaps his actions will help Dr. Fetzer get the attention of other scientists, and maybe some real answers can be provided for his questions.
Fetzer has yet to raise any questions that haven't been answered long ago. There is no legitmate scientific dispute over what caused: the towers to collapse

the hole in th Pentagon and

the hole in Shanksville.

Len

Brendan Slattery

There is a problem with your photo,

it seems your eyes are way too close together,

must be a problem with your software

and you should have that fixed.

You are right, Shanet. A makeover would do

wonders for his self-esteem.

Jack

I'm no friend of BS's he is probably the most obnoxiuous member of the forum, but this coming from Jack who hems and hollers so much about personal attacks is hypocritical. BS gets the gold medal, Jack gets the Silver.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...