Fahrenheit 911 (and a half): USATODAY.com - Filmmaker Moore, talker O'Reilly spar in Boston

USATODAY.com - Filmmaker Moore, talker O'Reilly spar in Boston: "Moore also came under fresh attack from Republican Party officials, who fired off a series of press releases in an effort to make Sen. John Kerry answer for some of Moore's most controversial opinions.
Taped the day before, the Fox encounter was a verbal slugfest between the left-wing Moore and the right-wing O'Reilly. The two took shots at each other - passionately but not rudely - for 12 minutes on The O'Reilly Factor. It was perhaps the hottest face-off so far at a largely news-free and debate-free convention.
At one point O'Reilly accused Moore, director of the anti-Bush film Fahrenheit 9/11, of being Saddam Hussein's 'biggest defender in the media.'
'That's insulting,' Moore said.
O'Reilly repeatedly pressed Moore to apologize to the president for saying Bush lied to the nation about whether there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before American troops entered that country.
'Actually it's President Bush that needs to apologize to the nation,' Moore said.
After O'Reilly said the Bush administration made a mistake when it based the rationale for war in part on weapons of mass destruction, Moore got the host to agree that parents of American soldiers killed in Iraq shouldn't be satisfied with the explanation 'we're sorry.'"

By Mark Memmott
USA TODAY

Watch complete 12 minute O'Reilly/Moore video discussion

1 Comments:

At 9:16 AM, JOlmsted said...: IMDb DiscussionGreg Thielmann, a WMD specialist at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research who worked on Iraq until his retirement in late 2002, also disputes Kay's assertion that the administration had nothing to do with the intelligence failure.

"Everyone knew that the White House was deaf to any information that would not substantiate its charges; that is a very unproductive environment for any intellectual inquiry," he said in a telephone interview. "The White House was never searching for the truth; it was searching for arguments to make the case for war." He continued, "They were searching for evidence to support the conclusions they had already reached."

"The perfect example is what the White House did not do in February 2003, after UN inspectors had been on the ground in Iraq for three months looking under roofs, examining facilities, interviewing weapons scientists, and giving us a lot better and fresher information base than we had had for the previous four years," said Thielmann.

"As far as I know, the White House never asked the intelligence community to update [its] October [2002] assessment to see whether any of its key judgments about Iraq should be modified in light of what the inspectors were seeing on the ground. And the reason is that the administration did not care what was going on on the ground. It was interested in going to war and convincing the American people and the international community that war was necessary," he said.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FB04Aa01.html

Helen_Wheels (Wed Jul 28 09:02:36)