O’Reilly: ‘It’s Bull’ That Torture Doesn’t Work
O’Reilly: ‘It’s Bull’ That Torture Doesn’t Work
Last night, in an interview with Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly praised the Bush administration “for doing a good job protecting Americans after 9/11″ and attributed its success to its “aggressive manner” of protection, including “Guantanamo, water boarding three times, and other things.” (Recall, in 2005, O’Reilly declared he would “order the execution” of everyone at Guantanamo if he could.)
O’Reilly then questioned Clinton’s opposition to torture, insisting that if the U.S. had “an al Qaeda big shot” in custody, he would “dunk him into water” — i.e., waterboard him. When told that torture does not produce “high quality” information, O’Reilly cried, “That’s bull!”:
O’REILLY: I believe the Bush administration has done a good job in protecting Americans after 9/11. … And they’ve done so in a very aggressive manner, Guantanamo, water boarding three times, and other things, OK? If we get an Al Qaida big shot who won’t talk, I’ll dunk him into water if there is, we believe — our intelligence agency believes there is an imminent attack. You won’t dunk him in the water, you won’t, I will. [...]
CLINTON: But if you actually talked to the people who were in the rooms with these guys, what they will tell me is that you do not get the high quality…
O’REILLY: That’s bull. It’s just bull. Michael Scheuer, who was the head of the bin Laden unit, sat there and said we broke these guys by waterboarding. It’s bull.
Watch it:
O’Reilly has long championed torture. He said that waterboarding isn’t “fatal” and “doesn’t leave a lasting injury,” and that people who oppose torture are “putting us all in danger.” Last October, he claimed that the Abu Ghraib scandal “was blown out of proportion.”
Of course, many experts — O’Reilly’s own opinion notwithstanding — agree that torture is ineffective. In Feburary, FBI Director Robert Mueller said his agency rejected using waterboarding, and Lt. Gen. Michael Maples of the Defense Intelligence Agency said torture was unnecessary. Another former FBI agent said the entire idea of a “ticking time bomb scenario” like the one O’Reilly cites is “a red herring” his agency had never encountered.
If those experts aren’t enough, perhaps O’Reilly should simply listen to his hero Gen. David Petraeus, who unequivocally rejected torture last year:
Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. That would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone ‘talk;’ however, what the individual says may be of questionable value.
After all, as O’Reilly himself said, “Petraeus is beyond reproach in my eyes.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
If Billo is correct (and I don’t think he is), then he’s calling John McCain a Traitor. John McCain caved under torture, and cooperated with his captors extensively.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:36 pmBildo…what a loofa lovin’ pussy! “I need boosh to keep me safe so I can sleep at night.”
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:38 pmAfter all, as O’Reilly himself said, “Petraeus is beyond reproach in my eyes.”
Who gives a flying shit you stupid looking goon ?
In your eyes , you believe sexual impropriety and misconduct are admirable………..
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:38 pmOf course “petraeus is beyond reproach,” but he doesn’t understand the value of torture as bo does. Actually, it was a politically correct statement by petraeus to show how sensitive he is to human rights.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:38 pmMeanwhile, some in the Bushco administration are starting to get worried about being charged with war crimes. Seriously, Billo’s just helping us out.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:39 pmBO’s theme should be…
Macho Macho Man
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:40 pmI want to be a Macho Man
Macho Macho Man
And furthermore if he actually encountered real Al-Qaeda, he would pee in his pants. Dam, why do people still watch this bloviating FOOL!
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:40 pmRobert, is he the construction worker,or the cop? ;)
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 pmO’reilly is a closet homosexual – not that there is anything wrong with that. Just look at him fawn all over any man in a uniform. I can just see his eyes glistening over the possibilities of a rendevoux. With Women, he is quick and rude. With men, he just gets all squishy.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 pmThey still don’t get it. All that the abuse of prisoners accomplishes is to justify the abuse of American citizens unfortunate enough to be taken prisoner. Military, paramilitary and civilian, the only safeguard, for Americans held by foreign powers, is the reputation for humanity we once had.
The U.S. adopted the Geneva Conventions to protect our own. Bushco has pissed it away, like so much else.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:45 pmCompare and contrast:
[O'Lielly]: Michael Scheuer, who was the head of the bin Laden unit, sat there and said we broke these guys by waterboarding.
c.f.
[Petraeus]: Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone ‘talk;’ however, what the individual says may be of questionable value.
I guess it depends on whether your goal is to “break” those “guys”, or if you want to get actual information. I think we have an idea where O’Lielly falls on that continuum….
Of course, whether it is “useful” in not the same as whether it is legal (or should be).
But if it’s not even “useful” (much less “necessary”), then there’s not even a conflict….
Cheers,
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:49 pmYou have to remember that this isn’t about protecting the country…this is about REVENGE and RETRIBUTION. These guys want to get their nutz off by torturing somebody to ‘pay them back for what they did on 9/11.’ Besides, isn’t the whole idea of America compromised beyond redemption when we sanction torture? Aren’t we supposed to be better than this? The whole idea of America is gone when we do these things. When will the Republicans who applaud this, and the people in America who cheerlead it, understand what this is doing to America? IT WON’T BE AMERICA MUCH LONGER IF WE KEEP THIS UP!!!
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pmWho wants to bet that we could make Bill say anything we wanted him to with waterboarding?
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:54 pmO’Reilly is what you call a coward, if this fk head was faced off with someone at least his equal in strength and height, he would piss his pants and wimper like a kicked puppy. Those who talk the toughest are the weakest, it is the tough talk they use to cover up their cowardness.
FkYu falafel sexual predator Dildo O’Lielly
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:57 pmGetting somebody to talk by waterboarding them isn’t difficult. Getting them to put forth quality information is another story.
Even our most famous POW, John McCain, was tortured into giving the VC the names of the people in his unit. McCain “broke” and named names. He gave his torturers the names of the Green Bay Packers defensive line.
Oh, and since waterboarding doesn’t leave a “lasting injury”, then Bill-o won’t mind undergoing the procedure just to demonstrate how harmless it is, will he?
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:57 pmOkay, ToonGuy. Let’s try it and see. I want to make him say, “I’m the second-stoopidest guy in the universe, right after Doug Feith.”
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:58 pmBig misatke for her to cuddle up to bildo. But she apparently is banking on bildo to save her face when fox feeds the democratic convention.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:02 pmOf course, many experts — O’Reilly’s own opinion notwithstanding — agree that torture is ineffective.
What experts? O’Reilly don’t need no stinkin experts. Hillary don’t need no stinking experts.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:10 pmGeeDubs Says:
You have to remember that this isn’t about protecting the country…this is about REVENGE and RETRIBUTION.
And I’m betting all the guys who were doing the torturing had woodies while they did it.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:10 pm.
Why does Bill O’Liely hate us for our freedoms?
.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:11 pmI envision a modern remake of the scene in “Little Shop of Horrors” where O’Liely plays the Bill Murray part and Com. Petraus is the Steve Martin character. But instead of the dental S & M scene it would take place in a dark room and involve water boarding…
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:12 pm“THANK YOU…THANK YOU…It’s your professionalism that I respect!”
Billdo & Hill-Dog, a match made in Hell…ahem, Fox.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:12 pmO’Reilly: ‘It’s Bull’ That Torture Doesn’t Work
You of course , being the foremost expert on interrogation techniques and tactics , O’Lielly , as is revealed by your extensive military and law enforcement careers…………
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:13 pmO’Reilly’s even being deceitful on the Michael Scheuer quote, too, because Scheuer has said torture is never the first option. He also said:
“Human rights is a very flexible concept… It depends how hypocritical you want to be on a particular day.”
So take that for what it’s worth. Even a man who’s been involved in torturing suspects acknowledges the question of morality.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:13 pm.
This comes from the same man who ranted about Saddam’s torture and rape rooms as something to be appalled at. Yet reserves those very types of acts and tactics as being commendable when the USA does it.
SEE, IT’S NOT TORTURE WHEN AMERICA DOES IT.
Bill-O just bellowed as much…
.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:16 pmI take back my last comment; I think Scheuer was just an analyist — I don’t think he was ever a field officer for the CIA, so he probably never actually had a hand in torture.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:17 pmNot that I’m advocating torture, but it would be amusing to see how long you would have to hold O’Reilly’s head under water to make him swear he loves Hillary Clinton, supports gay marriage and pines for a Prius.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:18 pmSo true puddleduck, so true.
Michael Scheuer on Frontline in October 18, 2005:
“the agency has long held that torture gets you virtually nothing. People tell you what you want to hear, or they tell you information that’s accurate but very dated, and ultimately ties you in knots and doesn’t move the process ahead anywhere.”
pbs/frontline link
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:22 pmIt’ll be interesting to see exactly what Rove et al spill about the Administration when we take to waterboarding THEM!
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:26 pmAnd yes, it would be retribution in my case, and YES, I would have a woody…
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:26 pmOne of the reasons that I shake my head whenever I hear this talk of ‘torture working’ is that the ones saying it really don’t seem to realize that some day, some American soldier, may just be in the hands of a bad guy and the bad guy might just recall all that news about Americans torturing and decide to get a little retribution.
Oh, I forgot, it’s okay when WE do it…
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:28 pmClinton camp, what are you going to do with this piece of info:
Shocking New 1992 Clinton Team Video!
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:28 pmWhat an unmitigated ass.
Say, how about we superglue his mouth shut? Anyone?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:30 pmWould supergluing his mouth shut be torture, or sweet, sweet relief for the rest of us?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:32 pmGeeDubs: the latter. ;o)
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:34 pmI always love the anti-intellectualism that goes on in these discussions. I was in the military; I was a prosecutor at the local and federal level; I was involved in a number of fairly intensive interrogations; and I taught the law of warfare to real soldiers. Torture does not work. However, we will see all of these conservatives with their advanced degrees from watching 24 Hours pontificating on how effective torture can be. It is not. The experts have chimed in with near unanimous opinions. However, these little limp, dic___ idiots know so much more than the experts. It is their mantra from whether we should have expected insurrection, whether their is global warming, whether abstinence education works to claim that those with experience and education in the area are just plain stupid. Oh yes retards. We know who the stupid people are. They are Republican and conservative. They are subnormal and ought to be spayed to prevent another generation of dolts who believe that retardation is actually a blessing and qualification for high public office.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:39 pmI believe he has all the costumes and put a different one on every night before he starts making his phone calls.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:40 pmleftright Says: Not all Muslims are terrorist but all terrorist are Muslim.
Living proof that “ignorance is bliss”?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:43 pmSo true, in five minutes we could get Bildo to confess that he was the mastermind behind 9/11. Which is funny. O’Reilly a mastermind, now that’s funny.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:43 pmThere is a reason statements made under torture are not admissible in a court of law: TORTURE DOES NOT WORK!!
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:43 pmThanks, new troll, for demonstrating that what really concerns wingnuts is NOT getting good intelligence, but simply getting their rocks off.
It’s not about using techniques that work best to protect America, it’s all about emotional satisfaction and vengeance.
Bet Hillary’s glad she decided to go on Bildo’s show now, huh?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 pmLooks like Mickey Kantor will be looking for a new job soon.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:47 pmleftright Says:
——————————————————————————–
These people beheaded and burned alive our men, innocent citizens, and even their own. What do you suggest we do? Give them a Big Mac and hope they die of heart failure. This is why we need a democrat in office so they can talk to indoctrinated people of a violent religion. Not all Muslims are terrorist but all terrorist are Muslim. Except for Timothy McVeigh who was Agnostic atheist!
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Really ?
When did Shrub convert to the religion of Islam , shithead ?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:56 pm“Not all Muslims are terrorist but all terrorist are Muslim. Except for Timothy McVeigh who was Agnostic atheist!”
leftright
—–
Ever heard of the Army of God, Kahane Chai, the ETA, the ANC, the IRA, the UDA? Come on man get serious!
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:00 pmdbadass beat me to it, plenty of terrorists aren’t Muslim. P.S. not that it really matters but McVeigh was a Roman Catholic…
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:03 pmSorry belac. Maybe you could offer up the Manuel Rodriquez Patriotic Front. That sure as hell doesn’t sound too Muslim
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:04 pmleftright Says:
Not all Muslims are terrorist but all terrorist are Muslim.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
____
So the ETA, IRA, FARC, Lord’s Resistance Army, Nepalese Maoists, and Kahanists are all Muslim?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:05 pmleftright Says:
——————————————————————————–
These people beheaded and burned alive our men, innocent citizens, and even their own. What do you suggest we do? Give them a Big Mac and hope they die of heart failure. This is why we need a democrat in office so they can talk to indoctrinated people of a violent religion. Not all Muslims are terrorist but all terrorist are Muslim. Except for Timothy McVeigh who was Agnostic atheist!
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
McVeigh was known throughout his life as a loner; his only known affiliations were voter registration with the Republican Party when he lived in New York, and a membership in the National Rifle Association while in the military.
After his parents’ divorce, McVeigh lived with his father; his sisters moved to Florida with their mother. He and his father were devout Roman Catholics who often attended daily Mass.
Feel better that you’re a lying sack of stupid shit , leftblight ?
BTW
What in the hell is an Agnostic atheist ? Agnosticism is the belief that metaphysical things , especially pertianing to an afterlife and “God specifically , are an unknown.
Atheism states there is no existence of either as its basis…….
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pmLet us not forget the Judean Peoples Front or the Peoples Front of Judea
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:11 pmdbadass Says:
Ever heard of the Army of God, Kahane Chai, the ETA, the ANC, the IRA, the UDA? Come on man get serious!
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:00 pm
hussein toasterhead Says:
So the ETA, IRA, FARC, Lord’s Resistance Army, Nepalese Maoists, and Kahanists are all Muslim?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Pwned :(
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:12 pmMaybe it’s from the same toy chest as “Islamofascist”?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:13 pmAgnostic atheist?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:15 pmUmmm, one who doesn’t know if he believes in God???
MCMetal Says:
What in the hell is an Agnostic atheist ? Agnosticism is the belief that metaphysical things , especially pertianing to an afterlife and “God specifically , are an unknown.
Atheism states there is no existence of either as its basis…….
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
_____
Perhaps it’s someone who believes that the lack of a diety is an unknown. As we know, there are known unknowns in the metaphysical realm, but it is perfectly legitimate to assume that there are unknown unknowns. Or unbelieved unbeliefs.
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:18 pmGee, leftblight, how many innocent men, women, children and babies did we Americans roast alive in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
How many innocent Iraqi and Afghani citizens have we Americans killed and brushed off as “collateral damage”…?
How many innocent individuals have we Americans imprisoned without charges and tortured?
So loser, that’s your cue to say, “That’s different!!”
Why? Because us nice, white, Christian Amurkins did all that, eh?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:22 pmDammit! Smart ass interuptus!
Let’s try again:
Agnostic atheist?
One who doesn’t know if they don’t believe in God???
Or one who’s unknown doesn’t believe in the unknown?
Or one who’s unbelief is based on the unknown?
Jebus, hussein toasterhead, now I’m really confused.
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:23 pmIs it 5:00 yet???
BO is an expert on types of torture. His show can be most painful to watch.
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:36 pmDRxJ Says:
Jebus, hussein toasterhead, now I’m really confused.
Is it 5:00 yet???
It’s 5:00 somewhere.
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:41 pmEven the hypocrite John McCain “confessed” under torture to things he didn’t believe in or do. TORTURE DOES NOT WORK. People tell lies, duh, to get them to stop.
Why are there so many complete MORONS in our government?
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pmI was going to comment on Leftright’s ludicrous comments but saw that it was already well covered. However, there are those who believe that the use of massive force to intimidate in retaliation to an attack is well justified. If that is the case, they should just simply inform our “enemy” that they have 45 miniutes to say a prayer and launch a massive nuclear attack against them. Only cowards hide their own tough deeds under a thin veil of deceiption and civility. Tell AQ and the others that any person caught will be tortured and beheaded. Do not pussyfoot around like some sort of sissy, panty waisted baby. Tell them that you are seeking revenge and do it.
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:00 pmActually, “waterboarding” and other physical abuse can be excluded. The simple act of imprisoning people indefinitely, without charge or hope of acquittal, could be considered “torture” under U.S. and international law. It certainly violates one of the highest ideals of our society; the right to a fair and speedy trial.
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:55 pmIf Petraeus is beyond reproach, why were the number of Americans killed in Iraq in April at a 7 month high.
How may more mission accomplished moments can we stand?
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:16 pmI’m a militant agnostic.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:33 pmMy position is I don’t know and neither do you.
O’Reilly: ‘It’s Torture’ That Bull Doesn’t Work»
May 2nd, 2008 at 9:48 pmJesus Christ, Bill. Just shut the f_ck up.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:22 amO’Reilly calls himself some sort of tradionalist. I ask – which century?
May 3rd, 2008 at 6:23 amAs for agnostic atheist. That is exactly what I would describe myself as.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:10 pm1. I do not believe in god/s
2. But I can’t completely rule it out
When it comes to terrorism we in the west almost always ignore state terrorism.
One has to wonder why torture would work on people who are ready to walk into a crowded area, with only Iragis and self destroy themselves with a bomb. Would they not have the fortitude to die for their cause? And if they did not, would the intelligence gained be of any real value? Once a tortured prisoner tells the intel folks something, how do they vet that info? If its gained by torture does that automatically make it true, or is the tortured deceiving to the end, an end that their religion and affiliations drive them to lie about, or deceive in any way possible.
Of course, if the deciever tells the CIA/miliitary intelligence folks what they want to hear, and expect to hear, who needs to vet it, right?
Telll me there are no false leads. Tell me and show me that torture brings out the truth, not deception. Keep it simple for the neocons and 24 Hours. Americans only want simple answers.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:32 pmI ask one thing of O Rielly here,
Sir, prove to us that torture works ?
Bill, your word on this issue is not beyond reproach and being a face on TV doesn’t make you the final judge of scruples. Nor does your monetary standing grant you true, keen, studied, unbiased journalistic values or a bastion of facts. Your bank account doesn’t accrue intelligence or enable ability to speak the truth.
Bill O, Prove torture works. And you can’t use the movie 24 hours as an example. That is imagination/drama. I realize Bill, your in comedy and may not understand.
May 5th, 2008 at 1:33 amIn this segment, O’Reilly stated, “Michael Scheuer, who was the head of the bin Laden unit, sat there and said we broke these guys by waterboarding.”
In an interview with the German newspaper, Die Zeit, Michael Scheuer stated, “Our experience is that aggressive questioning bordering on torture does not achieve results. Persons interrogated in this way tell the agent anything he wishes to hear. Either they lie or they give us precise but obsolete information.”
It’s worth reading the entire interview, though, as it contains a lot of context, like the fact that Mr. Scheuer, despite his stance on the use of aggressive questioning, supported the extraordinary rendition program and said that it started under the Clinton administration. One site it can be accessed at is http://www.counterpunch.org/kleine01072006.html.
Hope this information contributes positively to the discussion.
May 10th, 2008 at 9:01 pm