Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Bill O'Reilly's Iraq Mea Culpa...

Feb 12, 2004 11:11AM PST

"(AP) Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly says he was wrong about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that's made him more skeptical of the Bush administration as a result.

O'Reilly, who has the top-rated political talk show on cable news, was confronted on ABC's "Good Morning America" about his statement before the Iraq war that if Saddam Hussein is overthrown and there were no such weapons found, he'd apologize to the nation.

"Well, my analysis was wrong and I'm sorry," O'Reilly said.

"I am much more skeptical of the Bush administration now than I was at the time," he added.."

More...

Even many of GW's staunchest apologists are beginning to see the light...

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re:Bill O'Reilly's Iraq Mea Culpa...
Feb 12, 2004 11:27AM PST

"O'Reilly places the blame on intelligence officials for their pre-war assessments. "

- Collapse -
Seeing The Light....
Feb 12, 2004 12:07PM PST

"I am much more skeptical of the Bush administration now than I was at the time," he added.."

More...

Even many of GW's staunchest apologists are beginning to see the light. Then again, many will never see the light...

- Collapse -
Re:Seeing The Light....
Feb 12, 2004 12:16PM PST

Skepticism isn't bad.

Out and out hatred is different.

Sorry, I don't see you as skeptical of anything, just hating anything thought to be less than ultra left progressive liberal.

- Collapse -
Provide An Alternative...
Feb 12, 2004 1:48PM PST
Sorry, I don't see you as skeptical of anything, just hating anything thought to be less than ultra left progressive liberal. - Roger NC

Sorry Roger. I hate the actions and attitude of the radical Conservative right. I hate misguided actions that were based on lies and deception which have led to the deaths of over 540+ of our troops and counting. I hate misguided actions based on lies and deception that have led to the injuries of countless others. I hate the attempts to roll back environmental protections. I hate the welfare for the wealthy while over 2.2 million Americans have lost their jobs. I hate record breaking deficits as far as the eye can see. I hate the attempts of the radical right to divide, rather than unite our country. I hate that this administration has made the US the most hated country in the world. I hate that this administration has made us the biggest target in the world. I hate the attempt of this administration to stifle medical research which could be used to develop cures for un-Godly diseases...

I don't hate the person, but I hate just about everything he does and stands for. If you can provide an alternative who is a builder rather than destroyer, I wouldn't have much to hate...
- Collapse -
Like the man said...
Feb 13, 2004 12:17AM PST

there is no alternative for you.

- Collapse -
Three ideologies in four words...
Feb 12, 2004 3:03PM PST
"Sorry, I don't see you as skeptical of anything, just hating anything thought to be less than ultra left progressive liberal." - RogerNC

How on earth is it possible to have three different political ideologies? Ultra-left, progressive and liberal. With your argument the CPUS is a liberal party. Isn't there any difference between ultra left and liberal? If not, I assume you believe that there isn't any difference between conservatives and fascists either...
- Collapse -
Well I guess you could attribute it to the poor mental capabilities
Feb 12, 2004 10:34PM PST

of all us poor demented oldsters here in Speakeasy that just can't understand things.

Afterall, that is your impressions of us isn't it? First you thought we were immature then so old that we didn't get it.

roger

- Collapse -
BTW, no need to repeat the same quotes and link with nothing new
Feb 12, 2004 12:30PM PST

I read the post and the article linked the first time.

I don't have to read it twice to figure out what the words are.

roger

- Collapse -
If You Choose...
Feb 12, 2004 1:32PM PST
I don't have to read it twice to figure out what the words are. - Roger NC

Your obvious omission of the "rest of the story" made it necessary to remind the readers what you chose not to include in your response. You may not have missed O'Reilly's quote, but your response might have mislead others who did. So I provided the link again, not specifically for your benefit, but for their's so that they wouldn't have to return to the original link to go to the article. Feel free to ignore my second link and go back to the original if you so choose. For all others, here's the link again:

Bill O'Reilly's Iraq Mea Culpa...

I am much more skeptical of the Bush administration now than I was at the time" - Bill O'Reilly
- Collapse -
My ommission of the 'rest of the story'?
Feb 12, 2004 10:32PM PST

I provided a quote from your link that merely balenced the quote you provided.

Your quotes would indicate only that Bush administration was at fault.

Intelligence handling may be regarded as part of the administration, but most of the intelligence community has been there much longer than Bush, so I thought the balence was appropriate. So my providing a counterpoint to your slant from the same article is misleading.

Oh and I made a slight mistake, your second post of the same quotes and links wasn't indentical, it added one line "Then again, many will never see the light...". I guess that could be considered editoralizing. To me it sounds condescending, but then, that just my warped view isn't it?

Afterall, anyone that doesn't support your side of the spectrum isn't capable of understanding anything are they?

roger