PDA

View Full Version : Letterman Debates O'Reilly



Far7an
01-14-2006, 09:05 PM
:sl:

http://spikedhumor.com/articles/1092..._O_Reilly.html

Enjoy!
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
taebah
01-15-2006, 12:38 AM
lol
jazaak Allah khair
Reply

DaSangarTalib
01-15-2006, 12:58 AM
Hahaaaaaa!! this is funny

the guy talkin a lot of rubbish ;D He should stop talkin :hiding:

and hez gettin ripped Haha!
Reply

strider
01-15-2006, 11:09 AM
I didn't find it funny. He had a very valid point.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Ra`eesah
01-15-2006, 12:04 PM
Assalamu'Alaykum

It is true, this Bill O'Reilly character does not have any idea what he's talking about. I don't know if it's only me that caught this but, if you go back and listen you will see how much he knows. Going back to 2:35 he says and I Quote
Remember, M16 in Britain said the same thing
it's "MI6" (letter M, letter I, number 6) rather than what O'Reilly said, "M16" (letter m, number 1, number 6). The letters MI stand for Military Intelligence. This isn't the most statistically significant error, however in this context it does make O'Reilly sound like an unintelligent individual. It's like referring to the CIA as the C1A.

Strider, what exactly are those 'vaild points' that were made?
Reply

strider
01-15-2006, 03:27 PM
Assalamu alaikum

About the lingustical error..He made a mistake. Don't we all? :rollseyes

O'reily made a valid point when he was talking about that woman who is out saying to everyone that the insurgants are freedom-fighters:

It's all very well for that woman who lost her son, who btw was a soldier and when soldiers sign on they know they are putting their lives on the line, to say that the insurgants are freedom fighters but what about those people whos loved ones are dying because these so called freedom fighters are blowing themselves up along with many women and children. Do the people who blow themselves up or they blow a bomb up and a civilian FUNERAL, have the right to be called freedom-fighters? Who the hell are they bringing freedom too? No-one. They are causing nothing but bloodshed and more misery.

No way is a person who blows up women and children.. will be called a freedom fighter.
What 'rubbish' is he talking?

How legit the war is, is a different matter altogether.

Ma'assalama
Reply

Far7an
01-15-2006, 03:40 PM
:sl:

Strider, I would like to re-itterate Mr Letterman's final comment in that clip :)
Reply

Ra`eesah
01-15-2006, 03:49 PM
Assalamu'Alaykum

Strider it was not only that, but now that you mention it, lets break it down InshAllaah.
O'REILLY: If you want to question that and then revamp an intelligence agency that's obviously flawed, the Central Intelligence Agency...Remember, M16 [sic] in Britain said the same thing. Putin's people in Russia said the same thing. And so did Mubarak's intelligence agency in Egypt.

We can break O'Reilly's statement into four claims.

1. The CIA is "obviously flawed"
We could quibble about why exactly the CIA is flawed, but there's no question it is.

25% out of a possible 25%

2. " M16 [sic] in Britain said the same thing"
Again, we could argue about why MI6 said the same thing, but they pretty much did. However, it's "MI6" (letter m, letter i, number 6) rather than what O'Reilly said, "M16" (letter m, number 1, number 6). The letters MI stand for Military Intelligence. This isn't the most important mistake on earth, but in this context it does make O'Reilly sound like "an unintelligent individual". It's like referring to the CIA as the C1A. So O'Reilly only gets partial credit.

15% out of a possible 25%

3. "Putin's people in Russia said the same thing"


This claim seems to have originated in an undisclosed location deep within O'Reilly.


Here's a Guardian story from October 12, 2002:





Vladimir Putin yesterday rejected Anglo-American claims that Saddam Hussein already possesses weapons of mass destruction...


With a tense Mr Blair alongside him at his dacha near Moscow, the Russian president took the unusual step of citing this week's sceptical CIA report on the Iraqi military threat to assert: "Fears are one thing, hard facts are another".

"Russia does not have in its possession any trustworthy data that supports the existence of nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and we have not received any such information from our partners as yet.





0% out of a possible 25%


4. "...so did Mubarak's intelligence agency in Egypt"



This is another false-based statement. Here's a statement by Mubarak on October 30, 2002:
I hope Iraqi latest statements that they do not possess Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) would prove right and accept the unconditional return of UN weapons inspectors to Baghdad.

Here's an AP story from November 25, 2002:
Arab leaders have anxiously watched the U.S.-Iraq standoff over allegations Iraq is stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. Mubarak and other Arab leaders, saying a U.S.-Iraq war would plunge their already volatile neighborhood into chaos, have urged the United States to act with caution and await the outcome of U.N. inspections.

And from the MENA news agency in Egypt, on January 1, 2003:
As for the Iraqi crisis, President Mubarak voiced hope that Iraq would abide by UN Security Council Resolution 1441 and would not give any chance for war to break out. This could be done through Baghdad's full cooperation with international inspectors and to prove that it does not possess any weapons of mass destruction whether nuclear, chemical or biological, he said.
0% out of a possible 25%


40% TOTAL OUT OF A POSSIBLE 100% TOTAL

Or, to put it another way:

60% CRAP
( It has been edited to suit an Islamic Forum.)
Reply

strider
01-15-2006, 05:03 PM
Assalamu alaikum

Jazakumullah Khair. After i listened to the whole thing, something which still sticks out is what O'Reilly had to say about people who deem those who blow themselves and innocent people up as freedom fighters and hence i was drawn to reply to the thread, initially.

Btw, copying text from other people without citing sources is plagarism. :)

Ma'assalama
Reply

akulion
01-15-2006, 05:13 PM
o' Riley is so ridiclous

he is like a child who cant see logic but only sticks up for his own narrow minded patriotic act

he defeats himself by being so lame lol
Reply

akulion
01-15-2006, 05:23 PM
oh by the way people may wana watch this movie clip too

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/fox...an_050921a.mov

additionally people who blow up women and children include the US army because they bomb indiscriminately and kill people like that

so they are the biggest terrorists by that definition
Reply

Far7an
01-15-2006, 08:28 PM
:sl:

Btw, copying text from other people without citing sources is plagarism.
:rollseyes, read the post again InshaAllah, I'll highlight the sources too.

Here's a Guardian story from October 12, 2002
and..

Here's an AP story from November 25, 2002:
and..

And from the MENA news agency in Egypt, on January 1, 2003:
Reply

strider
01-15-2006, 08:49 PM
Assalamu alaikum

Yes, but you didn't come to that grand total of 60% by yourself did you? Take alittle look at tinyrevolution.com

Ma'assalama
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-10-2012, 12:10 AM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 06-10-2007, 11:43 PM
  3. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 04-18-2007, 10:17 PM
  4. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 06-30-2006, 10:15 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-30-2006, 09:35 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!