-Caveat Lector- http://www.onlinejournal.com/Media/030603Higdon/030603higdon.html Sometimes Talking Points talk back
By James Higdon Online Journal Contributing Editor March 6, 2003—We will be at war by the middle of this month, if not sooner, and that is the subject of this answer to Bill O'Reilly's Talking Points Memo for February 26, 2003. On that day, Bill O'Reilly attempted to do his best impression of Joseph Goebbels. It is said that during World War II Goebbels frequently commented on taking note of which Germans were not sufficiently patriotic in Hitler's Reich, and he claimed that they would be dealt with firmly after the war. O'Reilly went out of his way to instruct that FOX News would be handling this job for the illegitimate administration in the White House and "we expect every American to support our military, and if they can't do that, to shut up." The admonition would not be so bad in and of itself, but O'Reilly went out of his way to couple it with a threat. Americans who work toward putting an end to the oil grab once it "is underway will be considered enemies of the state by me . . . [L]et's just say you will be spotlighted." And according to Goebbels, the mentor of the FOX News philosophy, "[d] uring a war, news should be given out for instruction rather than information." This is the philosophy that seems to work for Americans completely devoid of the ability to think for themselves, and FOX has been hugely successful in cornering the market of that particular demographic. We should not overlook that these are the days of "compassionate" conservatism, and O'Reilly warmly informs us that "we don't want to demonize anyone," but once the usurper has made his executive decision (as it has apparently been made for him since the early 1990s) and soldiers lives are on the line, "patriotism must be factored in" to give the government the "benefit of the doubt, at least until the benefit has been proven wrong, as it was in Vietnam." Well, Mr. O'Reilly, "the benefit" was proven wrong in Vietnam precisely because courageous individuals ignored sanctimonious, money- grubbing, propagandists to protest, organize, and mobilize decent and moral Americans to stop that war. Unfortunately too late to prevent the loss of 50,000 of America's sons, fathers, husbands, and brothers in South East Asia, and 50,000 more to suicide upon the return of troops to the US. Without those patriotic Americans, my fascist friend, Americans might still be dying in a war that was never designed to end. How many American service personnel and Iraqi civilians will have to die before you believe that dissent should once again be permitted in this country? How many more American civilians will die under the ever increasing threat of terrorism before we can discuss diplomatic solutions to those things that incite terrorism? Knowing your history and the history of FOX News, Mr. O'Reilly, I suggest that the answer lies not in the number of dead, but in the amount of time it takes for unelected oil barons to secure Iraqi oil wells, and for a lawfully elected Democratic president to return to the White House and inherit the waste of incompetence, born of the "soft bigotry of low expectations" that George W. Bush will leave behind. O'Reilly, apparently unable to wait for the victorious smell of napalm in the morning, has "spotlighted" two Americans for career destruction, Sheryl Crow and Barbara Streisand. Streisand is given "fair warning" along with any others who share her beliefs. Sheryl Crow, on the other hand, is taken to task for failing to support the inevitable war for oil, but supporting our troops in Bosnia. O'Reilly and his cohorts can readily understand how one can "support our troops," but not our president (so long as the president is a lawfully, popularly elected Democrat), but are completely unaware of any conditions that might lead an American to support one war, but not another, nor the possibility of being able to support our young heroes who fight for democracy but not the current oil grab they are being ordered to die for. Such entertainments require too much concurrent thought which might lead FOX away from its logic limited demographic. Regardless, invading Iraq for oil is not quite the same as bombing to remove the military capability of a nation bent on genocide. Says O'Reilly to Crow, "Milosevic was a villain who allowed his army to rape and murder civilians. Saddam does the same thing. And Saddam has weapons far worse than anything Milosevic had. And we didn't get a U.N. mandate to bomb Belgrade." All too true. We didn't get a U.N. mandate to bomb Belgrade. We could have gotten one, because it would not have violated the U.N. charter. Hostilities had already broken out in the region prior to our entering the fray. However, the charter of the U.N. demands finding an alternative for war and it will become "irrelevant" if it backs Bush, because the Bush/ Cheney oil thirst is all there is to make hostilities imminent. I suspect that O'Reilly knows this, but a highly paid propagandist certainly has no business divulging all of the available facts. Yes, it is true that Saddam has tortured his own people. This, of course is not something that would be done by George W. Bush. The White House has said that torture to stop terrorism is justifiable, and the Ashcroft Department of Justice has made it plain that it recognizes that U.S. citizens have the right not to be tortured. Therefore the citizenship of any American will be stripped by the White House (on the say-so of the White House) before torture begins (don't believe me—then I suggest that you take a good, hard look at USA PATRIOT ACT II). Bush will surely be able to make the claim that he never tortured a fellow citizen. It is clear that the folks at FOX News are fully behind an invasion of Iraq. But why? It is not because Saddam has chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. On the basis of logic alone, one tends to believe that he hasn't got them. No one has found them, despite the best efforts of every major world intelligence service over 12 years. He didn't use them during the first Gulf War. He hasn't used them during more than 12 years of sanctions and bombing. There are no conditions inside Iraq that cannot be contained by continuous and ongoing U.N. inspections. FOX's quest for war is not based on Iraq's potential for developing nuclear weapons. Iraq simply doesn't have them, nor is it capable of developing a militarily usable nuclear device in the foreseeable future. Nor are terrorists likely to seek such weapons from Iraq. Al Qaeda is far more likely to purchase a nuclear device from countries which know how to make them, like North Korea or even Pakistan. There are currently only two countries in the entire world who are threatening others with weapons of mass destruction and a "preemptive" military strike. One is North Korea, and the other is the US. And it is a sad day, indeed. It was the United States, after all, which encouraged the world to label "preemptive" force as an international war crime. So, Bill, cast your longing gaze away from Hollywood celebrities for a moment, and look over here. I would be proud to have you view me as an enemy to whatever state you should wish to describe, because you, sir, are an enemy to everything America and Democracy stands for. If people want to "support our troops," as they should, they should start by doing everything in their power to prevent George W. Bush from using our fine young defenders as weapons in a crime against humanity. Addendum: Bill Made a Mistake In his Talking Points Memo of February 29, Bill O'Reilly says that he "made a mistake." "I was wrong when I said that Americans who continue demonstrating against the war once the shooting begins are being un-American . . . People who lawfully dissent should never be labeled un-American . . . I will call those who publicly criticize our country in a time of military crisis, which this is, bad Americans and it is my constitutional right to make that judgment and you are free to agree or disagree. You can call me a bad American for making that judgment," O'Reilly said. First, it is not the word, "un-American," that people take umbrage with. You may call me un-American all that you like, and I, sir, will merely consider the source. What is offensive beyond description is your admonishment that if we continue to speak out against an unnecessary and tragic waste of human life after the killing begins you will consider us "enemies of the state," and use your power as a prime time broadcast journalist to "spotlight" us. This would be an extraordinary abuse of your power, if you had any. I understand that the folks at FOX are all atwitter that you are the highest rated talking head on cable. I've seen the ratings. A whopping 2.8. The fact is that the ratings for all talking head shows are a bust. I remember, a short time ago, when anything less than a 10.0 would get a show pulled from the air before its next scheduled broadcast. Perhaps these shows would do better if they provided a lot more useful information and a lot less attitude. Second, we are not in a military crisis that is not of George W. Bush's making. Iraq poses no imminent threat to this country, and neither the CIA nor the FBI believe that Saddam has any relevant links to terrorist organizations. Neither the White House nor the Department of State have made any serious effort, that isn't tinged with black comedy, to persuade Americans of the need to risk World War III. Essentially what we get from Bush in Washington (or is he vacationing again in Crawford?) is, "Trust me, I'm your president [sic]." Every administration in our nation's history has made its case for war to the American people by either showing irrefutable evidence or manufacturing bogus evidence. George W. Bush is not even competent to do the latter. He appears before the entire world as a spoiled child throwing a temper tantrum. And as for you, Mr. O'Reilly, I would never call you a "bad American" for proudly stating your opinion before the American public. That, sir, is your inalienable right, and for you to put out your opinion for public consumption makes you a good American. However, for you to attempt to silence others, and for you to fail to gather competent opposing sentiment and all of the conflicting information that would enable the rest of America to come to informed conclusions makes you a very bad broadcast journalist, a very good fascist, or both. Shame on you! And shame on FOX. Download a printable version. For a free copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader, click here. The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Online Journal. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copyright © 1998-2003 Online Journal™. All rights reserved. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. Forwarded for your information. The text and intent of the article have to stand on their own merits. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe simply because it has been handed down for many genera- tions. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumoured by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of teachers, elders or wise men. Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all. Then accept it and live up to it." The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutra <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
