Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: Furor over Ground Zero mosque prompts "View" walkout
franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Fri 10/15/10 11:06 AM
Did Bill O'Reily not say in this mornings news that he appears on The View for publicity as do all other guests. "I enjoy jousting with 'The View' ladies because with the exception of Elisabeth Hasselbeck, they don't see it my way, and I want the audience to hear both sides." Bill O'Reilly

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Fri 10/15/10 11:12 AM
Did Bill O'Reily not say in this mornings news that he appears on The View for publicity as do all other guests. "I enjoy jousting with 'The View' ladies because with the exception of Elisabeth Hasselbeck, they don't see it my way, and I want the audience to hear both sides." Bill O'Reilly Im sure some guests go on because they enjoy the show or the hostesses,,,,, whether he wants the audience to hear both sides or wants it to APPEAR like he cares what the other side thinks,,,is another matter that I Cant read his mind well enough to discern but listening to how he treats guests on his show,, I dont think that claim is very sincere,,,

willing2 Joined Sun 06/08/08 Posts: 20221	Fri 10/15/10 11:15 AM
typical o'reily tactics..why trouble yourself with an honest debate when you can bully your views instead...? the guy got to say what he wanted and continues to be the golden boy-wonder of the conservative ditto heads. Post-Menopausal hysteria. Billy made the girls run and cry. In all fairness, Whoopsi didn't need to cuss him and the two run off crying. It was on their turf this happened. The girls should be professional enough to be in control of the topic.

franshade Joined Tue 07/24/07 Posts: 24704	Fri 10/15/10 11:20 AM
Did Bill O'Reily not say in this mornings news that he appears on The View for publicity as do all other guests. "I enjoy jousting with 'The View' ladies because with the exception of Elisabeth Hasselbeck, they don't see it my way, and I want the audience to hear both sides." Bill O'Reilly Im sure some guests go on because they enjoy the show or the hostesses,,,,, whether he wants the audience to hear both sides or wants it to APPEAR like he cares what the other side thinks,,,is another matter that I Cant read his mind well enough to discern but listening to how he treats guests on his show,, I dont think that claim is very sincere,,, I agree, while I'm certain most of the guests are there for publicity - one way or another they want to promote themselves, their ideas, merchandise, movies, books, etc., I agree with you I didnt take his appearance as sincere either. He was promoting his book as well. That was the quote he made this morning not mine.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Fri 10/15/10 11:23 AM
typical o'reily tactics..why trouble yourself with an honest debate when you can bully your views instead...? the guy got to say what he wanted and continues to be the golden boy-wonder of the conservative ditto heads. Post-Menopausal hysteria. Billy made the girls run and cry. In all fairness, Whoopsi didn't need to cuss him and the two run off crying. It was on their turf this happened. The girls should be professional enough to be in control of the topic. I agree, its unprofessional which is more unusual for the 'girls' than it is for O'Reilly I prefer their choice to remove themself from the conversation over his usual choice to over talk, interrupt, and yell over topics that arent going his way,,,though

willing2 Joined Sun 06/08/08 Posts: 20221	Fri 10/15/10 01:27 PM
I guess the whiny chicks wanna' see the Tower to Terrorism built. I wanna' see 'em pitch a hissie-fit when plans are pulled. Mentalpause is so much more fun to watch from the outside. Bill was one brave dude to hold his own with those two old broads mentalpausin' all over him.

willing2 Joined Sun 06/08/08 Posts: 20221	Fri 10/15/10 05:18 PM
This isn't worth a new thread. The old broad isn't over her mentalpause moment. She's still stewing. Someone please, throw her some Hormones before she explodes. Joy Behar, Bill O'Reilly Continue Trading Barbs USMagazine, October 15, 2010 After Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg walked out on "The View" Thursday during a discussion with Bill O'Reilly, Behar and O'Reilly have been telling the media about it. She and Goldberg, 54, had been in a heated debate over the mosque near ground zero. O'Reilly, 61, set them off when he declared Muslims "killed us on 9/11". "He's an idiot!" Behar, 68, told PopEater after the show. "I just couldn't sit there any longer and listen to him." On her Headline News show Thursday night, Behar continued her O'Reilly rant, stating that he had a "pinhead moment." She said she was "really angry. ... I thought he was saying something that I construe as hate speech, frankly." To say Muslims were responsible for 9/11, "to lump an entire group like that," is wrong, she said.<<<The terrorists were Muslims, dearie. O'Reilly also weighed in on the incident during his "Talking Points Memo" on FOX News' "The O'Reilly Factor" Thursday night. Defending his controversial remarks, he said, "I am not in the business of sugarcoating harsh realities. ... I enjoy jousting with the 'View' ladies because, with the exception of Elisabeth Hasselbeck, they don't see it my way. I loved that exposition today. Didn't you?"

s1owhand Joined Fri 05/18/07 Posts: 29437	Fri 10/15/10 05:45 PM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion

RKISIT Joined Tue 01/08/08 Posts: 16721	Fri 10/15/10 06:02 PM Edited by RKISIT on Fri 10/15/10 06:03 PM
i hate Bill,but he was right. you can break it down and dissect them all you want but when your done they are/were still muslims.they're just muslims in a extremist group with a name,they pray like muslims,they read the qur'an like muslims,they worship allah like muslims and you wanna know why, cause they are muslims,it's the faith they choose

RKISIT Joined Tue 01/08/08 Posts: 16721	Fri 10/15/10 06:05 PM Edited by RKISIT on Fri 10/15/10 06:08 PM
when a christian accepts jesus as his lord and savior walks into an abortion clinic and kills the doctor,he is still a christian by his/their beliefs

RKISIT Joined Tue 01/08/08 Posts: 16721	Fri 10/15/10 06:52 PM
what did leave everyone stuck on stupid...i'm sorry

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Fri 10/15/10 07:05 PM Edited by msharmony on Fri 10/15/10 07:08 PM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me)

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Fri 10/15/10 07:11 PM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant...

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 10/16/10 08:42 AM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11'

willing2 Joined Sun 06/08/08 Posts: 20221	Sat 10/16/10 08:46 AM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11' The only part of that statement that's not true is, the Muslims didn't kill all of us, just the folks in the towers.

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 10/16/10 08:51 AM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11' The only part of that statement that's not true is, the Muslims didn't kill all of us, just the folks in the towers. and likewise, not all the muslims killed those folks,,,

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Sat 10/16/10 11:54 AM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11' anything to get a rating...look at the pub they are getting now... and does anyone really think that those two women even care if that mosque is built?

msharmony Joined Mon 08/31/09 Posts: 61041	Sat 10/16/10 12:14 PM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11' anything to get a rating...look at the pub they are getting now... and does anyone really think that those two women even care if that mosque is built? If I can have an opinion about it, I dont see why they cant too. I thought what he said was offensive and would have probably done the same, at the risk of being unprofessional but sticking to my principles.

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Sat 10/16/10 12:24 PM
Bill was technically correct in that the attackers were Muslims. Obviously, all people of that faith did not attack or condone the attack, but the ones that did were using their faith as the major reason for attacking. This is the main reason most Americans feel a new nearby mosque is inappropriate. I have wondered this for years and here is as good a place to ask as any because I keep hearing it repeated since the proposal for the muslim center.... my question is,,,,, why do people believe that the attackers used their faith as a reason? I ask because there were no survivors to relate what they said or didnt say during the attack and I dont recall Osama Bin Laden giving some exclusive implying in his 'confessions' that Allah was a reason or a motivation , but I do recall the pretty lengthy political and historical contexts he used if anyone needs refreshing http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000622.htm ,,,yes, they were murderers and extremists but there was more politics involved in their attacks than religion,,,,in my opinion they are islamic militants and advocate universal islamic theocracy they do not make a distinction between politics and religion but it is disingenous to take a factual stand that religion MADE them do it,, ,, as I said Osamas 'confession' laid out plenty of POLITICAL and CULTURAL motives now , I could say I dont want black folks living next to me because BLACK MEN ARE GANGSTERS or I could say I dont want white men living next to me because WHITE MEN ARE SERIAL KILLERS and both of those statements, on the surface are ambiguous enough to be true or false because although many gagsters are BLACK,, all blacks are not gangsters and all gangsters are not black and even if it could be shown that a majority of black men might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, and although many serial killers are white males, all white males are not serial killers and all serial killers are not white males and even if it could be shown that a majority of white males might believe some of the same things it does not therefore follow that they hold ALL the same beliefs or support/condone all the same things,,, so such a DECLARATIVE statement implies an excuslive relation that is just not there to justify distrust or disenfranchisement of one group or another(in his example the muslims who want to build a center , and in mine the white or black people who wish to live next to me) he said islamic militants....are all militants pretty much the same? white, black, chinese...a militant is a militant... no, but the statement they walked out on was this 'muslims killed us on 9/11' anything to get a rating...look at the pub they are getting now... and does anyone really think that those two women even care if that mosque is built? If I can have an opinion about it, I dont see why they cant too. I thought what he said was offensive and would have probably done the same, at the risk of being unprofessional but sticking to my principles. i just see it as a publicity stunt...making a mountain out of a molehill...i never did see it as offensive, and probably never will.