O'Reilly versus Michael Moore - Must See TV Tonight

I got this in an email... it claims to be the complete (bootlegged?) transcript. If you ask me, O'Reilly won just because Moore kept refering to soldiers as children and not as adult volunteers:


"Moore: That�s fair, we�ll just stick to the issues

O�Reilly: The issues� alright good, now, one of the issues is you because you�ve been calling Bush a liar on weapons of mass destruction, the senate intelligence committee, Lord Butler�s investigation in Britain, and now the 911 Commission have all come out and said there was no lying on the part of President Bush. Plus, Gladimir Putin has said his intelligence told Bush there were weapons of mass destruction. Wanna apologize to the president now or later?

M: He didn�t tell the truth, he said there were weapons of mass destruction.

O: Yeah, but he didn�t lie, he was misinformed by - all of those investigations come to the same conclusion, that�s not a lie.

M: uh huh, so in other words if I told you right now that nothing was going on down here on the stage�

O: That would be a lie because we could see that wasn�t the truth

M: Well, I�d have to turn around to see it, and then I would realize, oh, Bill, I just told you something that wasn�t true� actually it�s president Bush that needs to apologize to the nation for telling an entire country that there were weapons of mass destruction, that they had evidence of this, and that there was some sort of connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11th, and he used that as a �

O: Ok, He never said that, but back to the other thing, if you, if Michael Moore is president �

M: I thought you said you saw the movie, I show all that in the movie

O: Which may happen if Hollywood, yeah, OK, fine �

M: But that was your question �

O: Just the issues. You�ve got three separate investigations plus the president of Russia all saying� British intelligence, US intelligence, Russian intelligence, told the president there were weapons of mass destruction, you say, �he lied.� This is not a lie if you believe it to be true, now he may have made a mistake, which is obvious �

M: Well, that�s almost pathological � I mean, many criminals believe what they say is true, they could pass a lie detector test �

O: Alright, now you�re dancing around a question �

M: No I�m not, there�s no dancing

O: He didn�t lie

M: He said something that wasn�t true

O: Based upon bad information given to him by legitimate sources

M: Now you know that they went to the CIA, Cheney went to the CIA, they wanted that information, they wouldn�t listen to anybody

O: They wouldn�t go by Russian intelligence and Blair�s intelligence too

M: His own people told him, I mean he went to Richard Clarke the day after September 11th and said �What you got on Iraq?� and Richard Clarke�s going �Oh well this wasn�t Iraq that did this sir, this was Al Qaeda.�

O: You�re diverting the issue�did you read Woodward�s book?

M: No, I haven�t read his book.

O: Woodward�s a good reporter, right? Good guy, you know who he is right?

M: I know who he is.

O: Ok, he says in his book George Tenet looked the president in the eye, like how I am looking you in the eye right now and said �President, weapons of mass destruction are a quote, end quote, �slam dunk� if you�re the president, you ignore all that?

M: Yeah, I would say that the CIA had done a pretty poor job.

O: I agree. The lieutenant was fired.

M: Yeah, but not before they took us to war based on his intelligence. This is a man who ran the CIA, a CIA that was so poorly organized and run that it wouldn�t communicate with the FBI before September 11th and as a result in part we didn�t have a very good intelligence system set up before September 11th

O: Nobody disputes that

M: Ok, so he screws up September 11th. Why would you then listen to him, he says this is a �slam dunk� and your going to go to war.

O: You�ve got MI-6 and Russian intelligence because they�re all saying the same thing that�s why. You�re not going to apologize to Bush, you are going to continue to call him a liar.

M: Oh, he lied to the nation, Bill, I can�t think of a worse thing to do for a president to lie to a country to take them to war, I mean, I don�t know a worse �

O: It wasn�t a lie

M: He did not tell the truth, what do you call that?

O: I call that bad information, acting on bad information � not a lie

M: A seven year old can get away with that �

O: Alright, your turn to ask me a question�

M: �Mom and Dad it was just bad information��

O: I�m not going to get you to admit it wasn�t a lie, go ahead

M: It was a lie, and now, which leads us to my question

O: OK

M: Over 900 of our brave soldiers are dead. What do you say to their parents?

O: What do I say to their parents? I say what every patriotic American would say. We are proud of your sons and daughters. They answered the call that their country gave them. We respect them and we feel terrible that they were killed.

M: And, but what were they killed for?

O: They were removing a brutal dictator who himself killed hundreds of thousands of people

M: Um, but that was not the reason that was given to them to go to war, to remove a brutal dictator

O: Well we�re back to the weapons of mass destruction

M: But that was the reason

O: The weapons of mass destruction

M: That we were told we were under some sort of imminent threat

O: That�s right

M: And there was no threat, was there?

O: It was a mistake

M: Oh, just a mistake, and that�s what you tell all the parents with a deceased child, �We�re sorry.� I don�t think that is good enough.

O: I don�t think its good enough either for those parents

M: So we agree on that

O: but that is the historical nature of what happened

M: Bill, if I made a mistake and I said something or did something as a result of my mistake but it resulted in the death of your child, how would you feel towards me?

O: It depends on whether the mistake was unintentional

M: No, not intentional, it was a mistake

O: Then if it was an unintentional mistake I cannot hold you morally responsible for that

M: Really, I�m driving down the road and I hit your child and your child is dead

O: If it were unintentional and you weren�t impaired or anything like that

M: So that�s all it is, if it was alcohol, even though it was a mistake � how would you feel towards me

O: Ok, now we are wandering

M: No, but my point is �

O: I saw what your point is and I answered your question

M: But why? What did they die for?

O: They died to remove a brutal dictator who had killed hundreds of thousands of people �

M: No, that was not the reason �

O: That�s what they died for

M: -they were given �

O: The weapons of mass destruction was a mistake

M: Well there were 30 other brutal dictators in this world �

O: Alright, I�ve got anther question�

M: Would you sacrifice�just finish on this. Would you sacrifice your child to remove one of the other 30 brutal dictators on this planet?

O: Depends what the circumstances were.

M: You would sacrifice your child?

O: I would sacrifice myself�I�m not talking for any children�to remove the Taliban. Would you?

M: Uh huh.

O: Would you? That�s my next question. Would you sacrifice yourself to remove the Taliban?

M: I would be willing to sacrifice my life to track down the people that killed 3,000 people on our soil.

O: Al Qeada was given refuge by the Taliban.

M: But we didn�t go after them�did we?

O: We removed the Taliban and killed three quarters of Al Qeada.

M: That�s why the Taliban are still killing our soldiers there.

O: OK, well look you cant kill everybody. You wouldn�t have invaded Afghanistan�you wouldn�t have invaded Afghanistan, would you?

M: No, I would have gone after the man that killed 3,000 people.

O: How?

M: As Richard Clarke says, our special forces were prohibited for two months from going to the area that we believed Osama was�

O: Why was that?

M: That�s my question.

O: Because Pakistan didn�t want its territory of sovereignty violated.

M: Not his was in Afghanistan, on the border, we didn�t go there. He got a two month head start.

O: Alright, you would not have removed the Taliban. You would not have removed that government?

M: No, unless it is a threat to us.

O: Any government? Hitler, in Germany, not a threat to us the beginning but over there executing people all day long�you would have let him go?

M: That�s not true. Hitler with Japan, attacked the United States.

O: Before�from 33-until 41 he wasn�t an imminent threat to the United States.

M: There�s a lot of things we should have done.

O: You wouldn�t have removed him.

M: I wouldn�t have even allowed him to come to power.

O: That was a preemption from Michael Moore�you would have invaded.

M: If we�d done our job, you want to get into to talking about what happened before WWI, woah, I�m trying to stop this war right now.

O: I know you are but�

M: Are you against that? Stopping this war?

O: No we cannot leave Iraq right now, we have to�

M: So you would sacrifice your child to secure Fallujah? I want to hear you say that.

O: I would sacrifice myself�

M: Your child�Its Bush sending the children there.

O: I would sacrifice myself.

M: You and I don�t go to war, because we�re too old�

O: Because if we back down, there will be more deaths and you know it.

M: Say �I Bill O�Reilly would sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah�

O: I�m not going to say what you say, you�re a, that�s ridiculous

M: You don�t believe that. Why should Bush sacrifice the children of people across America for this?

O: Look it�s a worldwide terrorism�I know that escapes you�

M: Wait a minute, terrorism? Iraq?

O: Yes. There are terrorist in Iraq.

M: Oh really? So Iraq now is responsible for the terrorism here?

O: Iraq aided terrorist�don�t you know anything about any of that?

M: So you�re saying Iraq is responsible for what?

O: I�m saying that Saddam Hussein aided all day long.

M: You�re not going to get me to defend Saddam Hussein.

O: I�m not? You�re his biggest defender in the media.

M: Now come on.

O: Look, if you were running he would still be sitting there.

M: How do you know that?

O: If you were running the country, he�d still be sitting there.

M: How do you know that?

O: You wouldn�t have removed him.

M: Look let me tell you something in the 1990s look at all the brutal dictators that were removed. Things were done, you take any of a number of countries whether its Eastern Europe, the people rose up. South Africa the whole world boycotted---

O: When Reagan was building up the arms, you were against that.

M: And the dictators were gone. Building up the arms did not cause the fall of Eastern Europe.

O: Of course it did, it bankrupted the Soviet Union and then it collapsed.

M: The people rose up.

O: why? Because they went bankrupt.

M: the same way we did in our country, the way we had our revolution. People rose up�

O: Alright alright.

M:--that�s how you, let me ask you this question.

O: One more.

M: How do you deliver democracy to a country? You don�t do it down the barrel of a gun. That�s not how you deliver it.

O: You give the people some kind of self-determination, which they never would have had under Saddam�

M: Why didn�t they rise up?

O: Because they couldn�t, it was a Gestapo-led place where they got their heads cut off�

M: well that�s true in many countries throughout the world__

O: It is, it�s a shame�

M:--and you know what people have done, they�ve risen up. You can do it in a number of ways . You can do it our way through a violent revolution, which we won, the French did it that way. You can do it by boycotting South Africa, they overthrew the dictator there. There�s many ways�

O: I�m glad we�ve had this discussion because it just shows you that I see the world my way, you see the world your way, alright�and the audience is watching us here and they can decide who is right and who is wrong and that�s the fair way to do it. Right?

M: Right, I would not sacrifice my child to secure Fallujah and you would?

O: I would sacrifice myself.

M: You wouldn�t send another child, another parents child to Fallujah, would you? You would sacrifice your life to secure Fallujah?

O: I would.

M: Can we sign him up? Can we sign him up right now?

O: That�s right.

M: Where�s the recruiter?

O: You�d love to get rid of me.

M: No I don�t want�I want you to live. I want you to live.

O: I appreciate that. Michael Moore everybody. There he is�"

Assuming this is accurate-

"I know you are, but what am I!?"

This is why I have no respect for politics.



[edit on 7-27-2004 by Esoterica]

Originally posted by Esoterica
Assuming this is accurate-
"I know you are, but what am I!?"

That quote isn't in the transcript. I think you misread it?

Originally posted by muppet

That quote isn't in the transcript. I think you misread it?

It wasn't in the transcript, but that's pretty much what they were saying to eachother.

Damn i missed it. I am glad to see some stood up and put MM in his place. Does MM think we still have the draft? The men and women in the military today were recruited not drafted. When they signed up for the military they knew there is a good chance they might go to war, especially after Sept. 11th. I know alot of people join the military for education but thats the risk you take. I do respect any man or woman in the uS military because they stand up and fight for what is right so i don't have to, Thank You. The US military, the majority of the US Military has done a damn good job in Iraq and i, like many of American, thank you for risking your life to make the US a safer place. To know that the Saddam himself can not pass these chemicals off to a terrorist group like Al-Queda makes me sleep better at night. We know Iraq was letting the Al-Queda members hide out in Iraq. Saddam is very stupid for allowing that to happen and he has been or will be punished.

Thank you again military men and women, i hope everyone makes it home soon.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

Ok, I watched the "Big Showdown" and thought it was a big letdown. Whenever you get 2 hotheads like that, I never expect to have actual debating going on. Just 2 people not backing down. Neither of them expected to sway the others opinions during a 4 minute sit down. It was just what I expected it would be.

Some points I want to make though. Why would Bill think that he could get Michael Moore to aplogize to the president is beyond me. Of course he's not going to apoligize. First off, whether his info was bad or not, technically Bush lied. Secondly, by apoligizing to Bush, he'd basically be saying that his documentary is all bogus too and that won't make him much money.

Also, I was getting really frustrated with Moore's question, "Would you send your kid to go and die in this war?" The question is totally out of context. No parent wants so send thier kid go to war and die. When someone joins up for the military, they know exactly what they are getting in to. In this war I would say that more than half who are fighting in it joined up right after 9-11-01 so that they could go to battle. I would never send my kid to die for my country, but I wouldn't stop them from joining up to do what they feel is right. I wish Bill would have responded that way.

Other than those 2 points, it was pretty much a boring segment.

Originally posted by mpeake
Whenever you get 2 hotheads like that, I never expect to have actual debating going on. Just 2 people not backing down. Neither of them expected to sway the others opinions during a 4 minute sit down.
Some points I want to make though.
Also, I was getting really frustrated with Moore's question, "Would you send your kid to go and die in this war?" The question is totally out of context. In this war I would say that more than half who are fighting in it joined up right after 9-11-01 so that they could go to battle. I would never send my kid to die for my country, but I wouldn't stop them from joining up to do what they feel is right. I wish Bill would have responded that way.

Even though it was a sad debate, according to other posts, i am still glad someone stood up to MM. I do agree Bill should of brought that up, that these men and women signed up to go fight, they were not drafted, it was their chose to risk their life for something they believed in.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

Even though it was a sad debate, according to other posts, i am still glad someone stood up to MM. I do agree Bill should of brought that up, that these men and women signed up to go fight, they were not drafted, it was their chose to risk their life for something they believed in.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

Quite a lot don't believe we should be over there. I know, I was over there.
If our leaders make stupid decisions that get our soldiers killed for no reason, all people can say is, "Well, they signed up for it?" There is a level of trust when you sign your life away to the government. The whole system is based on the belief that your leaders will take care of you in the defense of your nation. When a plane crashes, do you say, "Oh well, they bought the ticket, they knew it could crash? I hear so many say "Support the troops" but when they die all I hear is, "Well, they signed up for it"
Don't we owe it to the people we send to fights wars, not to choose pointeless invasions in which to kill them?

Originally posted by curme

Even though it was a sad debate, according to other posts, i am still glad someone stood up to MM. I do agree Bill should of brought that up, that these men and women signed up to go fight, they were not drafted, it was their chose to risk their life for something they believed in.

[edit on 28-7-2004 by AntiPolitrix]

Quite a lot don't believe we should be over there. I know, I was over there.
If our leaders make stupid decisions that get our soldiers killed for no reason, all people can say is, "Well, they signed up for it?" There is a level of trust when you sign your life away to the government. The whole system is based on the belief that your leaders will take care of you in the defense of your nation. When a plane crashes, do you say, "Oh well, they bought the ticket, they knew it could crash? I hear so many say "Support the troops" but when they die all I hear is, "Well, they signed up for it"
Don't we owe it to the people we send to fights wars, not to choose pointeless invasions in which to kill them?

I understand your point completely, as I have 2 brothers that have been over there already and are going back next month. But, lets put some things into context here. How many soldiers are over then. 20, 30, 50 thousand? More? I don't know the exact amt but I know it's a huge amt of people. Now how many have dies, a little over 900 I beleive. I don't see why we are playing that card. I know that I would be devestated to have someone in my family or a friend die over there, but I can't see that this war has been that costly to human lives as when you take into count the lives lost in previous major wars. If I was in a military leadership position, I'd say the loss of life has been low compared to what it could be. Now before you go saying I am heartless, i'm not. I'm just looking at the big picture.